Nordhavns - the Marmite motorboat

[Garold]

I think the Nordhavn is an appealing choice once one thinks of spending extended periods on board.

Since most full time or extended period liveaboards spend longer periods of time in the places they visit any Nordhavn just look really comfortable, warm, with proper deck/saloon level kitchen, and pleasant sitting places (like the wheelhouse). And there's room for spares, clothes, and all the extra stuff you need if you're on board for a few months or a year rather than a long weekend or a two week summer cruise.

They may be designed for crossing oceans but they really appeal for full timing for those of us that don't fancy the ocean thing.

Garold

 

[longjohnsilver]

No deffo not an E3 which looks to have a pokey upper and lower saloon. I want a spacious and bright upper deck with master and guest cabins down below* Galley to rear saloon and partly enclosable like Deleted User and Jez's Ferrettis. On top of that I want a flybridge.

Azimut Magellano and Beneteau Swift are on the right track, they just need to push the long range cruising and liveaboard concept further. Fairline 'Explorer' perhaps ?


* I also need a third utility area for tools and beer storage, work bench, washer and dryer pkus unsociable teenager berth.

That sounds very much like our DeFever 48, apart from the fact we only cruise at 7-8kts, and the stabs mean we can put a cup of tea down on a table in a F5 and expect it to stay there. But ours is a 30 year old boat, with a dishwasher, microwave, washing machine and tumble drier, a master cabin with a king size double, standing headroom throughout (including the engineroom for shorter people!) and 400 gallons of fresh water, so we can anchor for 4 weeks, have daily showers and still have water in reserve. Plus a fuel capacity of 3500 litres, so we generally only refuel once a year where we find cheap diesel. I guess what we have is a poor mans Nordhavn. We are often asked how far we can go on one tank of fuel, the answer is, I have no idea, like most others here I'm not interested in crossing oceans, the channel is far enough for us.

Only one small problem if you want one, Eos, to the best of my knowledge, is the only one in Europe, the rest are in USA.

 

[Greg2]

No deffo not an E3 which looks to have a pokey upper and lower saloon.

Not been on an Elling then Pete?

Wouldn't meet your ideal requirements but certainly not pokey

 

[petem]

Not been on an Elling then Pete?

Wouldn't meet your ideal requirements but certainly not pokey

Granted, I haven't been on one, but the upper deck, where surely you would spend time in the Med, does not look very spacious to me.

Perhaps better suited to Northern waters?

 

[Greg2]

Yes, maybe so. It doesn't feel cramped though and the electric sunroof is a real bonus. There is seating on the aft deck so with a Bimini that would be a good spot in the Med. I really like them

 

[petem]

Yes, maybe so. It doesn't feel cramped though and the electric sunroof is a real bonus. There is seating on the aft deck so with a Bimini that would be a good spot in the Med. I really like them

I certainly admire Elling for thinking outside the box and for the execution. Perhaps they're more a Marmite boat than an Nordhavn?

 

[Keen_Ed]

No deffo not an E3 which looks to have a pokey upper and lower saloon. I want a spacious and bright upper deck with master and guest cabins down below* Galley to rear saloon and partly enclosable like Deleted User and Jez's Ferrettis. On top of that I want a flybridge.

Azimut Magellano and Beneteau Swift are on the right track, they just need to push the long range cruising and liveaboard concept further. Fairline 'Explorer' perhaps ?


* I also need a third utility area for tools and beer storage, work bench, washer and dryer pkus unsociable teenager berth.

Sounds like the new FPB70

http://www.setsail.com/fpb-70-a-new-baby-sister/

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I certainly admire Elling for thinking outside the box and for the execution. Perhaps they're more a Marmite boat than an Nordhavn?

Tend to agree. Lack of flybridge + single engine option only limits its market IMHO. Lovely boat though

 

[Piers]

No absolutely not. A Fleming is a SD boat and Nordhavn a D boat and if you look at the underwater sections of each hull next to each other (as I had the opportunity to do at the Dusseldorf show a few years back) you see a big difference. The Nordhavn has much deeper fuller sections than the Fleming and is obviously built to resist pretty much anything the ocean can throw at it whereas, with all due respect to the Fleming which is a superb sea boat, its not designed to cross oceans. All I'm saying is that some people still want a boat like the Nordhavn with its ocean crossing capability but for coastal cruising and not have to worry about weather affecting their cruising plans

I'm a bit late coming into this thread, but here's my two pennyworth as a Fleming 55 owner.

To our mind, a Fleming just looks right. A really beautiful shape. Yes, Flemings have SD hulls and twin engines and the 55 can reportedly push up to 17 knots provided fuel and water tanks are only part full. Having learned we prefer to cruise at D speed of 8kts, we burn very little fuel. Now, if Fleming could take the shape and weld it to a D hull and power with only a single engine, that would be our perfect choice. Are they built to cross oceans? Yes, but they don't have the extra durability of a Nordhavn. Witness the armoured window shields for green water when necessary, the dogged doors, etc. Yet Flemings do cross oceans, often.

Now to Nordhavn. If we went on looks, we'd choose the 62 or the new 63. Still not as pretty as a Fleming, but a really good looking workhorse of a vessel. Single engine? Yes. D hull? Yes. Perfect. Other models seem to have a really high centre of gravity and trade looks for internal volume. Do they cross oceans. Yes.

So for us it comes down to that word compromise. So what would be key in our next purchase? Either a D hull with a single engine or a SD hull with twin much less powerful engines for D cruising.

Interesting debate, isn't it?

 

[petem]

Yes a very interesting debate. If a mainstream manufacturer were to build such a long range (slightly watered down Nordhavn) cruiser I do think it would be essential to offer twin and single engine options as folk seem to be very polarized about this.

 

[TwoHooter]

Hi Piers - we would have looked at Flemings if there had been any in our price range, but there weren't. Beautiful boats but the cheapest Fleming on the market last summer was more than double what our 40' Nordie cost. OTOH for reasons which I won't admit yet I personally would have gone for a Nordhavn anyway.

Now, if Fleming could take the shape and weld it to a D hull and power with only a single engine, that would be our perfect choice.

I'm intrigued by that - I never imagined any Fleming owners would want a single engine boat. May I ask why you would want one?

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I'm a bit late coming into this thread, but here's my two pennyworth as a Fleming 55 owner.

Hi Piers, agree entirely. The Flemings do look classically elegant and that is very much part of their appeal IMHO. Agree that some Nordhavn models like the 55, 60 and 64 do look top heavy and I once questioned a Nordhavn salesman about this at an exhibition. I'm no expert but FWIW I was told that Nordhavn prefer their boats to have a longer slower roll period rather than a shorter snappier one and the taller superstructure helps to achieve this. How this philosophy fits the lower profile boats like the 62 and 63 I have no idea. Certainly the Nordhavn 55 has a reputation for being rolly at anchor so maybe they overdid it a bit! Having said this they've sold a good number of 55/60 models and these have cruised all over the world so they must have got the CoG near enough right

 

[MapisM]

Now to Nordhavn. If we went on looks, we'd choose the 62 or the new 63.

Careful there, chalk and cheese springs to mind.

At the beginning of 2010, I spent some time in California.
And one day, while driving from San Diego to LA, I couldn't resist the temptation to stop in Dana Point and ask Nordhavn what used vessels they had for sale.
After all, the EUR bought 1.40+ USD back in those days, you know...
When I commented about a beautiful hull model of the 62 that was hanging from their office roof, the very kind but obviously eager to sell chap that we met understood that I have a soft spot for that boat.
Therefore, he thought that he could as well try to sell me their secret weapon: a brand new 63 (of which in those days they only had some drawings) aimed to improve the 62 in all respects, keeping the same layout, and costing less.
So, after a bit of time spent looking at the 63 drawings and specs, I looked at the 62 model above us, I thought at the 62 specs that I had more or less in mind, and I told that gentleman - let me summarise and see if my understanding is correct:
- You designed a new boat, aimed to appeal to those who like the 62.
- You actually made it smaller, lighter, with no bulbous bow, but called it a 63.
- You are planning to build it somewhere in China, probably with workers whose main experience is in shoes manufacturing or something similar, rather than at Ta Shing, that was already building boats well before Nordhavn even existed.
I bet it's going to cost less! Am I missing something?

The 63 drawings went immediately back in their drawer, and the chap showed me all the 62s which were for sale.
Which were quite a few btw, back then in the post-crisis days. And in hindsight, I might have invested better my money buying one... :ambivalence:

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Therefore, he thought that he could as well try to sell me their secret weapon: a brand new 63 (of which in those days they only had some drawings) aimed to improve the 62 in all respects, keeping the same layout, and costing less.

AFAIK the costing less bit was what drove the 63 because again AFAIK, it was a development of the same hull which was the basis of the 55 and 60 so when a customer came to them wanting a 62 style boat, they were able to justify building it

 

[TwoHooter]

You are planning to build it somewhere in China, probably with workers whose main experience is in shoes manufacturing or something similar, rather than at Ta Shing, that was already building boats well before Nordhavn even existed.:

MapisM - Sounds as though the salesman didn't do a very good job of describing the yard.... Just for the record, Nordhavns are built in 2 yards, Ta Shing in Tainan, Taiwan, and South Coast Marine who started building them in 1989 at Keelung near Taipei (also in Taiwan of course) but moved to a new yard in Xiamen on mainland China in 2003 which is where our N40 was built in 2005. This yard was taken over by another shipbuilder so in 2007 work began on a new factory which was finished in 2010, when you were at Dana Point. It now has 10 custom-built structures covering more than 255,000 square feet, a 150ft test tank, and a purpose-built training facility. The quality of the workmanship is very high - as our boat demonstrates. Nobody who has been on it has found a single sign of poor workmanship.

mkef - The first 63 was built for a Scottish customer who wanted a 62 that would fit into a particular lock, and yes it's built on a 60 hull with an aft wheelhouse. Full story here: http://issuu.com/k-c-mediaworks/docs/circumnavigatorv

 

[Piers]

Hi Piers, agree entirely...I was told that Nordhavn prefer their boats to have a longer slower roll period rather than a shorter snappier one and the taller superstructure helps to achieve this...

Now that comment sounds just a bit to 'salesy' to be believed. However, both Flemings and Nordhavs use stabilisers so you'll only the real issues when the stabs fail and you're caught in the Bay of Biscay in one of the perfect storms!

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Now that comment sounds just a bit to 'salesy' to be believed. However, both Flemings and Nordhavs use stabilisers so you'll only the real issues when the stabs fail and you're caught in the Bay of Biscay in one of the perfect storms!

It doesn't specifically refer to the N55/60 height but there's this on the Nordhavn website

P.A.E. has given a great amount of attention to determining the right combination of ultimate stability and roll period with the Nordhavns. Too much initial stability` and the boat will feel like it's "snapping" from one side to the other once it encounters rough conditions. Too little initial stability, and the boat will roll easily even in small seas. Finding the right roll period, or the frequency with which it rolls from side to side, is as much an art as it is a science, and it is important that a comfortable rate of roll is achieved through proper hull shape and location of the ship's center of gravity.

I find it hard to believe that Nordhavn, of all builders, would sacrifice stability for accommodation so I keep an open mind on this. For similar reasons, I have heard that Nordhavn prefer to store the tender up top rather than on the bathing platform

 

[MapisM]

MapisM - Sounds as though the salesman didn't do a very good job of describing the yard....

Ahem. I didn't want to name names, but work must have been slow that day in Dana Point, and there was only a secretary in sight when we entered their offices.
The lady, after asking if we could come back later because none of the salesmen were around, had the brilliant idea to check if the only guy who was in had some spare time for us.
As it turned out, it was JL (yep, one of those two JLs - it doesn't really matter which one) who welcomed us. So, the guy definitely knew his onions.
But back in those days, the quality problems that they were facing with the first boats coming out of Xiamen 2 plant were rather well known, though not exactly public domain.
So much so that he didn't even try to argue, when I implied that I would have rather spent my money for an older boat, but built by Ta Shing.
Otoh, it's fair to add that in those days I was also dealing with boats (of another US based/Taiwan built brand), and I didn't hide that to JL.
Now, while he appreciated (kind of) the fact that I was considering "their" boats rather than "mine" for my personal usage, maybe he would have defended more strongly their Chinese stuff with most other prospect clients - but I don't know really, just speculating now...
That said, afaik some rather serious problems like delamination were specific of early Xiamen 2 boats, so yours is definitely not involved.
And while AOTBE I would still prefer a Ta Shing boat to a Xiamen 1 boat , I'm sure that your fine vessel is much better built than most! :encouragement:

 

[MapisM]

I find it hard to believe that Nordhavn, of all builders, would sacrifice stability for accommodation

I don't think they need to.
It's quite possible to achieve a similar behaviour/stability from boats whose only difference is the superstructure height - just think of ballast, but there are also other components.
The reason why I don't like a lot high superstructures is more connected to internal liveability than anything else, and I'd rather sacrifice a bit of total space in favour of less internal steps - but that's me, of course.
With regard to sea keeping, I'm sure that the worst/highest Nordie can still cope with seas where the real problem is whether the crew can cope, not the boat!

 

[TwoHooter]

That said, afaik some rather serious problems like delamination were specific of early Xiamen 2 boats, so yours is definitely not involved. And while AOTBE I would still prefer a Ta Shing boat to a Xiamen 1 boat , I'm sure that your fine vessel is much better built than most! :encouragement:

That's a relief! This third-hand 11-year-old motorboat cost us almost as much as our house is worth!