Sunseeker superhawk 50

  • Thread starter Thread starter luicci
  • Start date Start date
L

luicci

Guest
I know it's totally different than the bavaria 37 sport but I'm getting a
2002 sunseeker superhawk 50: it has 350 hours, new teak, 3*425 yanmar surface prop, radar,chart plotter, auto pilot etc.
Any of you guys know anything about this boat? Any feedback?
And try guessing the price /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
well that's another one, it has been taken over by a bank so the price is
Edit: lets not give the price until i finalize the deal
 
Hi i take it back you are nothing like my wife she would never be so rash,enjoy regards m m 1.
 
I have a Superhawk 34 and am really happy.

There is a guy in the Burnham area who has a 50...the middle engine is problematical....gets very hot, runs badly as a result, awkwards to service.

Same problem with Tomahawk 41 model that came with three engines...the middle one can't breathe....

As long as that engin'es good and been looked after then well done, very jealous!!!!
 
One bed, one bog and three lumps in a fifty footer.........

thats some machine!!! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Stefan's experience is certainly WELL worth investigating.

A slim boat on surface drives isn't going to give you crazy fuel consumption figures.

Enjoy.
 
I was only reading the specs off the advert and did the maths roughly, but using the same specs and a calculator it is marginally better, IE; 1400 litre fuel capacity, range of 556 kilometres, 1 kilometre = 0.5399 Nautical mile = 300nm range
assuming diesel by next spring to be somewhere around the 140ppl mark (guess work I know) a fill up will cost £1960 it's only £6.53 per mile not that bad, if you say it quickly, and noone is listening, especially yourself! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

as said before, she's out of my league, to buy or run,

but I hope you enjoy, Sunseekers are very nice craft, not that I'm bias in anyway /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
the middle engine is problematical....gets very hot, runs badly as a result, awkwards to service.

[/ QUOTE ]Really? Judging by the pic below, access doesn't seem too bad, just compare it with Greg's Targa 35...
Though of course, for such a boat and triple engines, a staggered configuration would have been ideal.
God knows why they didn't go that route, maybe just to keep the engine bay shorter.
On a side note, luicci, will her be your first boat? You know she'll be a nightmare when maneuvering, do you? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
59276.jpg

DSCF1293.jpg
 
Yes it will be my first boat.
I plan on taking a 2 day offshore course, and I don't think that it's going to be that bad (is it gonna be that bad?) It has a bow thruster
I live in the U.S and the harbor where i'm gonna put it in
(newport harbor,CA) isn't tight.
 
My pal has a Superhawk 48 with triple 230 Volvos. I have driven it and it is a dream to handle. You just use the 2 outer engines when manouvering in the marina. At sea it is a really exciting drivers boat and goes like stink. You will be pleased to hear on the fuel consumption front that at cruising speeds, ie 34 knots the boat uses only 1/6 more fuel than my Martinique did with only 2 of the same engines. These calcs were done several times and came out the same every time. Your 420`s are a more modern design engine so should be even more frugal.
I am very jealouse but wish you alot of fun with her. Should my pockets get deeper one day I would buy the same boat /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
 
They just accepted my offer for $220,000, and the boat is here in California. I'll post some pics tomorrow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top