Trawler questions

[alrod]

I'm new to the forum and to trawlers in general, currently owning a 22 panga fishing boat and 24 foot Bayliner. My question relates to choosing the right trawler for short passages in the Caribbean area. I've read about the various designs, including KK, Nordhavns, etc. but would like something that will allow me to gunk hole in relatively shallow areas. Also, I like simplicity and the redundancy of two engines, as well as the fact that the hull design does not need paravanes.

Previously the issue of the Mirage Great Harbor 37 & 47 and their suitability for travel from East to West Coast through the Panama Canal was raised. However, I did not find a definite answer as to whether these boats were suitable for such passage which allows for many stops along the way. Neither have I found any information from the manufacturer addressing this matter as it pertains to the GH37 class trawler.

It is understood that the GH 37/47 are coastal trawlers not suitable for long passages, however, being that I'm considering upon retirement cruising primarily in the Caribbean, I'd like to know if a trip, for example from Key West to Isla Mujeres, and from there to Caiman would be feasable with any degree of confidence. We saw one of these boats at the Miami boat show couple of years ago and my wife likes how much they feel like a house.

Thanks in advance for any assistance in clarifying this matter.

[marshmat]

Hi alrod,

Welcome to boatdesign.net :)

The Great Harbour 37/47 are interesting boats, certainly somewhat unusual when compared to other trawler yachts. Where many of the competitors have a deep, slack-bilged hull shape that often seems to have offshore fishing ancestry, Great Harbour ( http://www.mirage-mfg.com/index.html ) uses shallow, hard-chine hulls that look to be derived more from coastal workboat forms.

We don't have any of either craft anywhere near here, as far as I know. I've never seen one in any of the nearby marinas, and they don't show up at the boat shows up here.

From the reviews and photos I've seen, they are very much house-like and I think the spaces are a bit too open for serious offshore use. But I would think Caribbean cruising is well within the realm of their capability, provided you keep an eye on the weather. I think a couple have crossed to Hawaii on their own bottoms, although that would probably necessitate waiting a while for the right weather window.

They seem to be very big on the complex, expensive mechanical and electrical systems. This is not an uncommon fault among large, luxurious boats. But keep in mind that all of this equipment that gives you modern landlubber luxury, is going to require a small army of mechanics and specialty technicians to keep it running.

They claim unsinkability- an iffy claim (see Titanic)- but being essentially unballasted and built of lightweight cored composites, one would probably have a decent chance of remaining afloat in a disaster. How those lightweight cored composites hold up over time is another matter, and one that calls for a thorough once-over by a really, really good surveyor before buying used.

They are, however, a long way from being inexpensive....

[alrod]

Thanks for the reply to my inquiry. I believe the Mirage Trawler that went to Hawaii is the N37 class Ho'Okele. See the following link: http://www.greatharbourtrawlers.com/html/hawaii02.html

The N37 has less windage although it does share the same hull as the GH37 class. It also has considerably less living space. One of the things I've read about these boats is the righting moment capabilities that are touted. It is said that they can literally right themselves up from 180 degree submersion - I can't find the link on this, I believe it was an article by Lou Codega. My concern is the GH37 class boat behaviour in ten plus foot seas during a short passage as described above. I have not found any literature in this regard.

[Tad]

Unballasted, lightweight cored construction, shallow draft, wide beam.....all these factors add up to a high sided box floating on top of the water. Motion in a seaway will be quick and exaggerated due to fast shifts of the center of buoyancy in a wide flat hull. These hulls are extremely comfortable at the dock or in flat water cruising, I doubt Lou Codega foresaw this boat being used for ocean cruising.

A deeper, narrower, round section hull will have more motion, but it will be slower and more predictable. Also a narrower boat will be faster (more efficient) in headwind or seas.

In my opinion there are far better boats available for your intended cruising grounds.

[Steve W]

For your intended purpose i would think a smaller displacement power catamaran would be well suited, 2 small diesels spaced far apart give great manouverability and about as good fuel economy as you can get in a powerboat,shallow draft, lots of bright airy accomadations and plenty seaworthy for your type of cruising,the PDQ 34 would be a good choice and has a kind of a trawler look.
Steve.

[alrod]

The PDQ 34 looks very interesting. I like the shallow draft although it is more fuel thirsty than the GH37 and with faster cruising speed. Wonder how it would work as a live aboard.

I would not consider the GH37 were it not advertised as the perfect coastal and Great Loop trawler, that can also take you around in the Caribbean. Any other trawler suggestions that meet the low draft criteria would be appreciated ?

Also, it appears that based on your answers, even though this is a coastal cruiser, no one would consider taking it around Central America and up the West Coast.

Thanks for your previous and future comments.

Al

[tranmkp]

a mild hijack, regarding trawlers - I have switched over from the sail side - however, I too would like to do some offshore cruising - just point to point, nor more than 50-75 miles offshore. However I am concerned about the dreaded snap roll that is not so nice. setting up booms and running fish seems dangerous... active stabilizers are out of my price range.

Seems that there is just no middle ground in hull form - trawler = very beamy for length. While a motor sailor is going to be much less beamy (living room).

Is there such an animal as a keel centerboard trawler???

[big-boss]

It always comes to tha same conclusion. There is no boat for the "little guys" that want to travel and explore the coastline.

I just want to go out of Morro Bay to Alaska. Stop along the way and be able to keep it in my 36ft slip. Seems like I am always reenventing the wheel but I am not it is just not out there. Fishing boats, Express cruiser, none of them are right. I am closer to what I want with the old Uniflite I have.

Where is that 35ft NOrdhaven for under $100K when you need it?

[Tad]

alrod....

Very experienced people can make remarkable voyages in marginal vessels. Sending noobs to sea in even very good boats is questionable. Stuff happens out there, it can turn out okay if you do the right thing quickly. Unfortunately situations that are not life threatening sometimes scare people (especially wives who don't understand what's happening).

The PDQ 34 is again a fine boat for inland cruising, it is not intended as a full time liveaboard or ocean cruiser. It has 1/3-1/4 the space of the GH37. Load carrying will be far less.

tranm & BB....

We're currently working on a small offshore capable displacement power boat, the Timbercoast Troller 22'. This design will be marketed by Bartender Boats. It's not a bartender though it does share the double-ended form. The hull is a deep vee single chine form with full keel. Power is a 3 cylinder diesel of less than 30HP for 7 knot cruising speed. A semi-production aluminum version is anticipated. The 22' will be followed by 27' and 16' foot models. Pic of the 22' below....
27501

27502

[FAST FRED]

There is no boat for the "little guys" that want to travel and explore the coastline.

I would look at the Ranger or other trailerable "cruisers".You can extend your range at low cost with a trailer hitch on your car.

The problem is not SEAWORTHYNESS , its comfort. Google ,Marne Marie (close?) an early transatlantic cruiser.1930ish.

Most folks want tiny boats to be as comfortable as huge boats , no chance.

The use of flopper stoppers CAN be very simple and is hardly a hassle on a many day passage.

Do not fear/dismiss what you have no experience with.

FF

[El Sea]

Alrod,

You currently have a Panga & a Bayliner, both are great for the right application. For going to the Bahamas you can choose from any of the trawlers from 32' to what ever you can afford. The point is, watch your weather window, your sea conditions and go for it.



El Sea,


"It's the voyage, not the vessel"

[joz]

Tad like your pics is the two extra poles are they for looks or are they for some purpose? Also I like the stay sail did you put that in for stability reasons?

[Tad]

joz....

The poles hinge outboard to run paravane stabilizers. These are tiny, 6-10 pounds, very easy to set and retrieve. The sail is for steadying, used with a jib the boat could sail (not fast but moving) across or downwind to get home should there be an engine problem.

[big-boss]

Can you put paravanes on a planing hul? Just keep it at hull speed? Or am I messed up? Thanks

[Tad]

Planing hulls are (mostly) quite stable dynamically, paravanes could react wildly at any speed over 8-9 knots and loads on the gear would be frightening.

The Timbercoast is a 7 knot boat, see the post above. While she is a deep-vee double-ender, she is a full displacement boat. The standard planing Bartender is a moderate vee becoming flat bottomed at the transom.

[joz]

Thanks for that Tad

[tranmkp]

still a nagging question in my head. Concerning long keels in trawlers. I am under the impression that one does not add ballast in the keel for stability. That the sability comes from the hull form and that the keel is there for directional stability. ok I can sort of see this and how it relates to semi-displacement hulls. But what is the difference in really heavy full dilplacement hulls? They have keels too but because they are immersed so deeply that the actual hull gives it the stability? I am becoming befuddled as I know that sailboats are displacement hulls and so are tugbats. Yes one is more shallower and uses external ballast and the other is way down there - but boat are limited to hull speed. Sooo, if a semidisplacement boat (sisu, duffy...) gets most of its stability from static hull form why not add ballast in the keel to control roll?

[Tad]

tranm...

Lot's of factors at work affecting the stability characteristics of a particular boat. Usually a conflicting requirement gets involved in limiting stability. In the case of semi-displacement boats, more ballast is not added because that's adding weight, weight limits speed, speed is more important than stability, and so it goes.

Transverse stability is not really related to whether a boat is sail or power, displacement or planing hull. That is to say that every hull (no matter it's form) is acted upon by the same factors. A key factor in transverse stability is the length of GM. Raising M means a longer GM and thus more stability, lowering G also means a longer GM and more stability. M is dependent on hull form (BM = I/V), G is dependent on the vertical CG of all items that make up the boat.

B is the center of buoyancy (center of underwater volume)
M is the metacenter (theoretical point about which the hull rotates)
I is inertia of waterplane (a barge has a different waterplane from a kayak)
V is immersed volume (displacement)

Change any of these factors, or change G, and stability changes.

In a shallow semi-planing powerboat B and I are high because the waterplane is wide and full (higher CP), V is low, but BM ends up fairly long as B is not far under water. If G is not too high (big deckhouse) GM is short (low ultimate stability) and roll is snappy.

In a modern sailboat (shallow canoe body) I is low (fine waterplane) and B is lower than the semi-planing boat, V is moderate and BM is not that long. But G is much lower than the powerboat thus GM is longer (Higher ultimate stability) but motion much different.

[kraftee]

Hi, I'm new to the Boards - and I know that this is an OLD thread - but after reading it and seeing the misinfomation, well, I just HAD to respond.

I am Sales Manager for Mirage Manufacturing, builder of the Great Harbour Trawlers and Mirage Sportfish boats. I spend a LOT of time aboard - in fact, I log about 5,000 miles per year aboard the various Great Harbour models - inshore, nearshore and in multi-night offshore passages. I CAN talk enthusiastically and knowledgably about our products.

The gentleman who started this thread asked a simple question. He wanted to know if a Great Harbour trawler was suitable for use in the Caribbean and to traverse the Panama Canal to head up the West Coast. Well, instead of correct information from posters who might have been aboard a Great Harbour offshore, he gets UNINFORMED CONJECTURE from posters with EXACTLY ZERO EXPERIENCE!

Rather than throw stones here, let me make a few simple statements of fact. Great Harbours are not "...high sided box(es) floating on top of the water..." They are VERY HEAVY, FULL-DISPLACEMENT, UNSINKABLE, OFFSHORE-CAPABLE yachts with simple, owner-serviceable systems, HUGE engine rooms, reliable home appliances, VERY livable spaces, TONS of storage, TWIN small diesels, shallow draft and easily-maintained, NO-WOOD exteriors. Our hulls are SOLID fiberglass (two-inches thick at the bows) - not cored. We only have coring from the rubrails up - and that coring is plastic honeycomb, vacuum-bagged NidaCore. No maintenace, no rot, excellent sound and heat insulation. The coring in the decks and superstructure - combined with no ballast is what gives us our unsinkability. We will float even when fully swamped. Physics.

Best of all, our Form-Stable hulls are naturally stable both underway and at rest and do not rely on expensive, complex, dangerous stabilizer systems. Believe me, we build HEAVY, FULL-DISPLACMENT boats. We displace exactly as much water as other full-displacement boats of similar size. We just take our displcement OUT rather than down. Again. Physics.

But that's enough ranting from me. If the original poster still logs on to these boards, I am more than happy to discuss the benefits, features and limitations of our boats. Alternatively, I am happy to arrange for him to correspond with any of our long-term owners - or Ken Fickett (owner of our company) or even Lou Codega (our hull designer). Finally, the answer to his original question is a resounding YES. Our boats were DESIGNED for exactly the type of trip he envisioned.

Sorry if I ruffled any feathers here, but I really think that people should not answer posts unless they have something FACTUAL - or at least within their experience - to add to the conversation.

ERIC

[Sheepy]

All boats ARE sinkable. End of story! I don't care what you say otherwise.

[apex1]

I really think that people should not answer posts unless they have something FACTUAL - or at least within their experience - to add to the conversation.

ERIC

YOU did not add anything factual here! Just a rant and salesmen drivel!

And calling the contributors here unexperienced...............
well, it makes your product look poorer than it might be!

Richard

[kraftee]

Well I guess you are entitled to your OPINIONS, but when I said "inexperienced", I think it is quite plain that I meant inexperienced with this particular brand/type of boats. And you cannot argue that.

ALL boats are sinkable? Well, I guess you are right. If you loaded TONS of lead aboard, you could probably get it to sink. Otherwise, No.

[apex1]

Inexperienced with the brand, you may be right in some cases. With the type of boats, the contributors are not!

[kraftee]

Look, I understand that there are MANY posters on this board with DECADES of boating experience and with HUGE amounts of design knowledge. I was referring specifically to the posters on this thread who offered sheer conjecture about our hard-chined, full displacement trawlers. They may have tons of boating experience and they may even have displacement trawler experience, but unless they have cruised extensively aboard a Great Harbour - or a modern hard-chined work/fishing boat - then I stand by my statement that they are "inexperienced".

[marshmat]

Eric (kraftee),

No need to be quite so quick to anger, mate.

Regarding construction: At the time this thread was started, the Great Harbour website and marketing materials were really hyping the light cored composites. I see that at present, the fact that the hulls are >1" solid features prominently on the website, and a reasonably detailed list of the materials and construction techniques used is also there. Not many builders are so open about what goes into their products. Still, I have spent enough time working with exotic composites to know to insist on a thorough inspection by a very good surveyor, even for a brand new boat, if such materials are involved in any way.

Regarding hull form: Perhaps Tad's initial observations about the GH line might have been inaccurate, but I can't find much wrong with anything he's posted here. Shallow draught, plus wide beam, plus unballasted, plus a light superstructure, does suggest a sharp, snappy motion in a seaway. Then again, at 21 tonnes, the GH37 / N37 is very much on the heavy side for a boat of her length. And it has been well known for at least a century that longer, narrower hulls are more efficient and tend to maintain better VMG in rough conditions than do shorter, wider hulls of comparable displacement.

Regarding systems: "Owner maintainable" can mean a lot of things. To an engineer like me, a lot more things are owner maintainable than would be the case for someone less mechanically minded. Great Harbour- like most luxury trawler builders- lists a fairly comprehensive inventory of fairly complex systems for all their boats, and the maintenance costs and time will scale accordingly. House-like spaces and appliances are sure to be appreciated by coastal cruisers, but will leave the crew cursing if they hit a blow offshore and start getting tossed around.

I would love to spend some time on a GH trawler- from what I've read about them and from what owners and reviewers have written about them, they seem to be very well suited for coastal cruising and island hopping, plus the occasional longer passage in nice weather. Since GH never shows up at the boat shows around here and I have not seen a single one on Lake Ontario to date, I doubt I'll get the chance just yet.

Richard (Apex),
I think it's OK to turn that German temper down, my friend.... the point has been made and I think Eric sees where you're coming from.

[kraftee]

Matt,

I am sincerely sorry if I offended you or any of the other posters on the board. But, you would not believe the misinfomation that is bandied about - especially online - about our boats due to two facts. 1) Our vertical hull sides give the (not altogether true) impression of more windage than similarly sized trawlers. 2) Our shallow draft leads many to assume that we are somehow displacing less water than other deep-keeled, ballasted "traditional" trawlers.

Although it would probably not be productive to get into an in-depth (pun intended) discussion on these issues, I am happy to discuss anything specific that might puzzle you about our boats. Suffice to say that I have been in all kinds of conditions offshore in our boats. I am generally on a tight delivery schedule and I don't ever have the luxury of waiting for "favorable" weather. They truly live up to our hype about their comfort and stability.

If you would truly like to experience a Great Harbour trawler underway, we have an excellent charter program available on our N37 and N47 models in the Abacos. Contact me if you are interested - I'll even throw in a discount! I am also always looking for crew on passages to the Bahamas or to boat shows, etc. We don't pay you for crewing with us - but we'll feed you!

ERIC

[apex1]

Nice offer Eric thank you!
But for me boating starts at 88´ or 27 meter!

I did not want to give you the impression that I have any negative comments on your boats. I do´nt know them, so how would I have even a opinion.

Just the way you valued the experience of some of our well respected members here was a bit too harsh imho!


Richard (Apex),
I think it's OK to turn that German temper down, my friend.... the point has been made and I think Eric sees where you're coming from.

There was no such "German temper" Matt! That looks (and feels) quite different.:D

Regards
Richard

[kraftee]

88' - Wow! That's not a boat - that's a ship! We do have a brand-new 74-footer on the drawing boards - and with its 24' beam, it's darned near as big as the typical 80-footer! If you're at all curious, take a look at this: http://www.greatharbourtrawlers.com/pdf/GH74PR.pdf

[apex1]

Thanks Eric,

yes I´m talking ship, not boat. You can see a first glimpse here:

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/metal-boat-building/offer-true-go-anywhere-trawler-build-side-side-28678.html

Regards
Richard

[kraftee]

Best of luck with your project.

[Tad]

Eric....

The internet is a dangerous place......I see I'm quoted on your website, presumably as some sort of expert? Inexperienced? You know nothing of my experience. But that's okay, you must defend your product....in this case against nothing.

The reason I post on this forum is to try and help folks understand something concerning naval architecture or boat design. I often have to clarify statements that are taken out of context or misunderstood.

Boats are available in all manner of shapes and sizes, this is good and keeps us all busy. And everyone has an axe or two to grind (sell).

When I stated........
"Unballasted, lightweight cored construction, shallow draft, wide beam.....all these factors add up to a high sided box floating on top of the water. Motion in a seaway will be quick and exaggerated due to fast shifts of the center of buoyancy in a wide flat hull."

I believe your website states Great Harbour's are unballasted?

I believe a great deal is made of cored construction in your product literature? As opposed to say....all steel construction?

I believe a great deal is made of shallow draft in your product literature?

True you are careful not to say "wide", rather you state, "stable" and "roomy". But everything is relative, compared to my Passagemaker Lite 46' with 11'6" beam, the 15'10" beam of your GH47 is wide.

I include the comparison drawing below to clarify my statement concerning a "box floating on top of the water"....folks can make up their own minds on that one....

The comparison vessel is my design, the Ocean 55'. LOA is 55'0", LWL is 51'2", beam is 15', draft is 6'0", displacement about 75,000 pounds at half load, cruising speed is 7 knots with a 105 HP John Deere turning a 40" wheel through a 4:1 reduction gear.

The GH47 is 46'10" LOA, LWL is 46'1", beam is 15'10", draft is 2'10", displacement is 70,000 pounds full load, cruising speed 8.25 knots with twin 75HP Yanmars.

38119

I believe that, referencing the drawing above, you should be able to understand that as each boat heels, the shift of B outboard will be quicker (and farther) in the GH than in the Ocean. What this implies is that motion (righting force) will be more quickly applied. Some folks are comforted by this rapid righting, others are worn out by it and would prefer the slower and deeper rolling of the Ocean type hull.

Neither boat is right for everyone......

[dskira]

I'm new to the forum and to trawlers in general, currently owning a 22 panga fishing boat and 24 foot Bayliner. My question relates to choosing the right trawler for short passages in the Caribbean area. I've read about the various designs, including KK, Nordhavns, etc. but would like something that will allow me to gunk hole in relatively shallow areas. Also, I like simplicity and the redundancy of two engines, as well as the fact that the hull design does not need paravanes.

Previously the issue of the Mirage Great Harbor 37 & 47 and their suitability for travel from East to West Coast through the Panama Canal was raised. However, I did not find a definite answer as to whether these boats were suitable for such passage which allows for many stops along the way. Neither have I found any information from the manufacturer addressing this matter as it pertains to the GH37 class trawler.

It is understood that the GH 37/47 are coastal trawlers not suitable for long passages, however, being that I'm considering upon retirement cruising primarily in the Caribbean, I'd like to know if a trip, for example from Key West to Isla Mujeres, and from there to Caiman would be feasable with any degree of confidence. We saw one of these boats at the Miami boat show couple of years ago and my wife likes how much they feel like a house.

Thanks in advance for any assistance in clarifying this matter.

In my humble opinion you should talk privatly with TAD.
He has a great experiences in motor boat.
You can even have him design the boat of your dream.
To be precise: I know TAD by his work, I don't know him privatly and I never had any business with him.
Cheers
Daniel

[Guillermo]

I'm wondering how the GH's perform in really hard (a force 10, i.e) sustained oceanic conditions with their shallow draught and high superstructure.

In my humble opinion they seem rather oriented to island hopping and anchoring in shallow protected waters, which probably they do nicely, but I may be wrong.

Cheers.

[Guest62110524]

all rather intrigueing
could you put up a stability curve of the boat in question please

[apex1]

I'm wondering how the GH's perform in really hard (a force 10, i.e) sustained oceanic conditions with their shallow draught and high superstructure.

In my humble opinion they seem rather oriented to island hopping and anchoring in shallow protected waters, which probably they do nicely, but I may be wrong.

Cheers.

They do´nt perform well Guillermo.
There was a rather hot debate on another forum or blog about one year ago. Could´nt find it again.
The result was pretty clear, Bahamas to Key Largo yes (but every bathtub can). Westcoast to Hawaii, as one of the boats made, was good luck and bad seamanship!

Regards
Riccard

[marshmat]

I'm wondering how the GH's perform in really hard (a force 10, i.e) sustained oceanic conditions with their shallow draught and high superstructure.

In my humble opinion they seem rather oriented to island hopping and anchoring in shallow protected waters, which probably they do nicely, but I may be wrong.

Cheers.
The hulls are modelled after hard-chine coastal workboats. The interiors are modelled after waterfront condominiums. Serious blue-water crews tend to want more confined spaces (less room to get tossed around) and deeper-riding hulls, although that's not to say a GH couldn't be outfitted with sufficient hand-holds and tie-down points to handle getting tossed around offshore.
I tend to agree that, based on the manufacturer's specs, and the owner reports and reviews I've seen, the Great Harbour boats are intended more for coastal passages and island hopping than for extended ocean passages. (Which makes sense- after all, coastal cruising is a much larger market, and one that tends to be turned off by true offshore features.) I won't pass judgement, though, until I've been on one myself.

[Pierre R]

Hi, I'm new to the Boards - and I know that this is an OLD thread - but after reading it and seeing the misinfomation, well, I just HAD to respond.

I am Sales Manager for Mirage Manufacturing, builder of the Great Harbour Trawlers and Mirage Sportfish boats. I spend a LOT of time aboard - in fact, I log about 5,000 miles per year aboard the various Great Harbour models - inshore, nearshore and in multi-night offshore passages. I CAN talk enthusiastically and knowledgably about our products.

The gentleman who started this thread asked a simple question. He wanted to know if a Great Harbour trawler was suitable for use in the Caribbean and to traverse the Panama Canal to head up the West Coast. Well, instead of correct information from posters who might have been aboard a Great Harbour offshore, he gets UNINFORMED CONJECTURE from posters with EXACTLY ZERO EXPERIENCE!I will caution what I say because in other forums in the past you have been very agressive against anyone who has posted anything negative in any way about the GH.

The GH certainly does not have underwater design going for her in terms of a sea friendly design. What she does have going for her is Inertia. She's a tank and slow to get tossed around because of that but that does not substitute for underwater design. Waves are still waves and have their own physics associated with them.

The GH is still a boat that is largely going to follow the surface of the wave patterns. The wave patterns where the GH shows a great deal of discomfort are not that uncommon in coastal waters or in the open ocean. I know people who you have trashed for saying the GH delivers a harsh ride in a beam on short chop of 2' to 4' waves. The kind of waves found in places like Lake Erie, the Chesapeake and Albermarle Sound.

I do not think the GH boats are a bad boats if used as really intended by the designer but I think you oversell them and in listening to new owners, I think you are effective at that. Buyer beware. Sea boats make lousy houses and houses make lousy sea boats. You can have your house and a sea boat too but it starts at around 50'. Tad is one of my hero's and right on the money.

I think the GH is a fine boat, a fantastic liveaboard boat and a fine coastal cruiser if you watch your weather. Then again, I suppose you are no different than the rest of the boat reps. They all seem to be trying to sell fair weather coastal cruisers as go anywhere boats. The GP seems think that if it looks like a trawler or a tug it must be seaworthy regardless of the real underwater design and dynamic stability parameters. If it looks like their house they like it. I cannot fault Mirage for that. The boats I really like woundn't sell cuz they are real sea boats.

Now I expect you to trash me but not maybe as bad as others before me. I do like the GH within reason.

[dskira]

Hi, I'm new to the Boards - and I know that this is an OLD thread - but after reading it and seeing the misinfomation, well, I just HAD to respond.

I am Sales Manager for Mirage Manufacturing, builder of the Great Harbour Trawlers and Mirage Sportfish boats. I spend a LOT of time aboard - in fact, I log about 5,000 miles per year aboard the various Great Harbour models - inshore, nearshore and in multi-night offshore passages. I CAN talk enthusiastically and knowledgably about our products.

The gentleman who started this thread asked a simple question. He wanted to know if a Great Harbour trawler was suitable for use in the Caribbean and to traverse the Panama Canal to head up the West Coast. Well, instead of correct information from posters who might have been aboard a Great Harbour offshore, he gets UNINFORMED CONJECTURE from posters with EXACTLY ZERO EXPERIENCE!

Rather than throw stones here, let me make a few simple statements of fact. Great Harbours are not "...high sided box(es) floating on top of the water..." They are VERY HEAVY, FULL-DISPLACEMENT, UNSINKABLE, OFFSHORE-CAPABLE yachts with simple, owner-serviceable systems, HUGE engine rooms, reliable home appliances, VERY livable spaces, TONS of storage, TWIN small diesels, shallow draft and easily-maintained, NO-WOOD exteriors. Our hulls are SOLID fiberglass (two-inches thick at the bows) - not cored. We only have coring from the rubrails up - and that coring is plastic honeycomb, vacuum-bagged NidaCore. No maintenace, no rot, excellent sound and heat insulation. The coring in the decks and superstructure - combined with no ballast is what gives us our unsinkability. We will float even when fully swamped. Physics.

Best of all, our Form-Stable hulls are naturally stable both underway and at rest and do not rely on expensive, complex, dangerous stabilizer systems. Believe me, we build HEAVY, FULL-DISPLACMENT boats. We displace exactly as much water as other full-displacement boats of similar size. We just take our displcement OUT rather than down. Again. Physics.

But that's enough ranting from me. If the original poster still logs on to these boards, I am more than happy to discuss the benefits, features and limitations of our boats. Alternatively, I am happy to arrange for him to correspond with any of our long-term owners - or Ken Fickett (owner of our company) or even Lou Codega (our hull designer). Finally, the answer to his original question is a resounding YES. Our boats were DESIGNED for exactly the type of trip he envisioned.

Sorry if I ruffled any feathers here, but I really think that people should not answer posts unless they have something FACTUAL - or at least within their experience - to add to the conversation.

ERIC

Lets face it, the GH is a great barge with a lot of accommodation.
You don't need experience when a hull looks like a barge, it is a barge.
Be realistic, and the GH will be even a better boat without the selling speach of the sale manager.
Cheers
Daniel

[FAST FRED]

Most every sailboat has positive stability , and should come right side up after a roll.

The mast may go but the basic boat will be intact. Loads of production cookies have circumnavigated

There is loads of experience rolling USCG boats inverted and letting them right , if they can.

Would be great fun to see this barge rolled, then salvaged.

OR just the stabilty graph to compare to known ocean worthy vessels

FF

[El Sea]

Alrod,

Most boats are suitable for your ventures IF you choose the right weather window and feel capable with your own skills.


"It's the voyage, not the vessel"