cruising costs, maintenance and price of the boat (sailboats versus motorboats)

[Vikendios]

Dear Vega :

My point is you can compare a 10 yr old GB 42 or 36 to a new Beneteau of the same size : The purchase price will be about the same. The emphasis is on 10 yr old vs. new. The 10 yr old will require more maintenance, but retired people have the time.

Concerning your quote :

'They are also boats that are intended to be used by old guys, because those are the only ones that can afford them'

My point was that young people will never be interested in slow motor boats, at least none that I know of except a few ecolos and even these will always go for wind power in the end.

Obligado,

Vikendios

[Vega]

Originally Posted by Willallison

Vega:
So - the end result - even when operating in Europe, where the cost of fuel is higher than almost anywhere else in the world, is the for the vast majority of people, a motorboat will be cheaper to own and operate than a comparable sailboat.
I believe my initial point is proven, yet again

Williallison, I don’t want to prove anything, but if you insist in wanting to prove something, try something else, because this simply is not true: “for the vast majority of people, a motorboat will be cheaper to own and to operate than a comparable sailboat”.

And it is not true because as I have demonstrated, the initial price of a boat has a huge importance in the total cost of owning a boat. As I can not have an adequate motorboat for less than twice the price of an oceangoing sailboat, in what regards budget cruising, a sailboat will always be less expensive by a huge margin.

I have learned something about engines on this thread. The engines of these motorboats are not like sailboats engines and it is not only a question of power. I have made the calculations and I have found out that in the end, with an initial higher price, it costs less per hour than a sailboat engine (0,825euros/h to 1,5euros/h). But that happens only if you make a huge number of hours. If you make only 4000 hours or so, then the initial cost of the engine will simply make a boat a lot more expensive to own, because the initial price of a boat will be a lot higher.

The difference between a 40hp sailboat engine and a 125hp motorboat engine (like the Caterpillar 3056 in the Sturier) is almost the double of the price of a rig and sails for a boat with the same size.

That partially explains why the true oceangoing motorboats are so expensive and why they are not a match for a sailboat, regarding budget cruising and total ownership costs.

I have said that:

“….. it was pointless to make the comparison between the Oceanis and any other comparable new market production motorboat. If that comparison was made the Oceanis would win by a large margin, not because it would be cheaper to operate, but because its initial price would be half of price of the motorboat, and that would have a huge relevance in the final result.”

And I have said that the match with the Cheyolee36 and the Adams40 was only a match, because the Cheyolee36 was 10 years older than the Adams. If the boats had the same age, the superior initial cost of the Cheyolee would make it a lot more expensive to own.

Vikendios has understood that, even if I doubt that a 10 year old Grand Banks costs the same as a new Oceanis39 :

Originally Posted by Vikendios

Dear Vega :

My point is you can compare a 10 yr old GB 42 or 36 to a new Beneteau of the same size : The purchase price will be about the same. The emphasis is on 10 yr old vs. new. The 10 yr old will require more maintenance, but retired people have the time.Vikendios

[fcfc]

Originally Posted by Vega

.....
The difference between a 40hp sailboat engine and a 125hp motorboat engine (like the Caterpillar 3056 in the Sturier) is almost the double of the price of a rig and sails for a boat with the same size.

No.

See http://www.frenchmarine.com/Product.aspx?PID=505&CID=79
You have the price of a D2-40. The price, given £ exchange rate and taxes roughly translates to 13000 euros.

The N67 NMA M15 125 hp iveco marine engine is listed at 13340 euros. http://www.brizmotors.ru/sud1.php
roughly equivalent to the caterpilar engine . http://www.maesco.com/products/mar_prop/N67MNAM15.pdf .
I agree that price do not include gearbox and taxes. A heavy gearbox (ZF63) is about 3000 euros.

So the difference is about 6000 euros. I do not think you can buy sails and rig/mast for a 40 ft for that amount.

For the same power, the john deere marine engine 4045TFM (4.5L turbo) is even less expensive than the iveco N67.


Even if you compare with a Deutz DT44 (115 hp), from the same reseller http://www.frenchmarine.com/Product.aspx?PID=211&CID=81 with a Z45A gearbox, the difference would be only around 7000 euros.

[fcfc]

Originally Posted by Vega

That partially explains why the true oceangoing motorboats are so expensive and why they are not a match for a sailboat, regarding budget cruising and total ownership costs

Neither.

Ocean going motorboats are more expensive simply because the ones you look are VERY heavy. The Sturier is more than TWICE the weight of an Oceanis. The Nordhavn 40 is THREE time.

People who buy this kind of motorboats would find absoloutely inacceptable the comfort (or lack of...) or the scantlings of an Oceanis.

[Vega]

Originally Posted by fcfc

No.

See http://www.frenchmarine.com/Product.aspx?PID=505&CID=79
You have the price of a D2-40. The price, given £ exchange rate and taxes roughly translates to 13000 euros.

The N67 NMA M15 125 hp iveco marine engine is listed at 13340 euros. http://www.brizmotors.ru/sud1.php
roughly equivalent to the caterpilar engine . http://www.maesco.com/products/mar_prop/N67MNAM15.pdf .
I agree that price do not include gearbox and taxes. A heavy gearbox (ZF63) is about 3000 euros.

So the difference is about 6000 euros. I do not think you can buy sails and rig/mast for a 40 ft for that amount.
.

You say a lot of engines prices, except the Caterpillar 3056 price.

This is the only reference I could find. I will see the correct price tomorrow.

Caterpillar 3056 6 cyl Auction: 3/1-3/2006 in Moerdijk (Price entered as 51,000 Euro.)

http://www.machinerytrader.com/listi...&man=KEESTRACK

[Vega]

Originally Posted by fcfc

Ocean going motorboats are more expensive simply because the ones you look are VERY heavy. The Sturier is more than TWICE the weight of an Oceanis. The Nordhavn 40 is THREE time.

But I agree, of course, without the very low CG of a sailboat given by ballast in a deep keel, the only way to ensure the stability needed to an oceangoing vessel is increasing weight. That will increase costs and the engine power needed, increasing consumption and again, costs.

Originally Posted by fcfc

People who buy this kind of motorboats would find absoloutely inacceptable the comfort (or lack of...) or the scantlings of an Oceanis.

I agree, but that is completely irrelevant.

We are talking about the least expensive way to cruise, budget cruising if you want. You are saying that those motorboats are not appropriate for that because people who buy them are not interested in budget cruising ...and I agree, they are expensive boats for rich people.... It is what I am saying, there are no inexpensive oceangoing cruiser motorboats in the market.

These guys are the ones that can not live without a floating Hotel and as Fred said: “Complex boats with water makers , freezers , air cond , washers , dryers , large refrigerators and sat internet will cost loads more than the folks that think a wind scoop and cockpit sun cover are the Hight of Luxury” and these last ones are the ones that do budget cruising, a different breed, and it is not only a difference in money but also a difference in style.

[fcfc]

Originally Posted by Vega

You say a lot of engines prices, except the Caterpillar 3056 price.

This is the only reference I could find. I will see the correct price tomorrow.

Caterpillar 3056 6 cyl Auction: 3/1-3/2006 in Moerdijk (Price entered as 51,000 Euro.)

http://www.machinerytrader.com/listi...&man=KEESTRACK

Seems you confused the engine with the equipment powered by the engine
http://www.vanhemertgrondverzet.nl/keestrack.htm

[Vega]

Originally Posted by fcfc

Seems you confused the engine with the equipment powered by the engine
http://www.vanhemertgrondverzet.nl/keestrack.htm

Yes you are right, but only about this

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by yacht371

The 37 foot version is found at www.aviadesign.com/mc37.htm

This one is not yet final, nor approved for production. Comments welcome.

Grahame Shannon

Grahame,
Will it have ocean crossing or at least long range capability? What could it be the price range?

[fcfc]

Originally Posted by Vega

But I agree, of course, without the very low CG of a sailboat given by ballast in a deep keel, the only way to ensure the stability needed to an oceangoing vessel is increasing weight. ....

I do not agree with this. So how do JM Tanton TAMETA ( http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/sh...big/perpage/12 ) or JB Brouns JMF39 ( listed in a previous post ) to get their stability and seaworthiness, since they have about the same weight as an Oceanis ?

I foresee marketing problems, but I do not see what technical point could prevent Beneteau from building a clone in FRP of above boats for a price similar or even lower than a Oceanis 393.

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by fcfc

Neither.

Ocean going motorboats are more expensive simply because the ones you look are VERY heavy. The Sturier is more than TWICE the weight of an Oceanis. The Nordhavn 40 is THREE time.

People who buy this kind of motorboats would find absoloutely inacceptable the comfort (or lack of...) or the scantlings of an Oceanis.

I agree.

I also agree when Vega states that there are not cheap long range motorboats in the market (as to be compared with the long range ability of a sail boat). Because they cannot be.

If they carry a lot of fuel and they have to be fuel efficient, so with a low HP/D ratio, and at the same time reach a reasonable cruising speed, we only get this with long, narrow boats. We'd go well up of 50' for such a boat. And length is the most expensive dimension, from all points of view. So, if you go expensive, you go expensive, forget about cheapness and pour into it a bunch of luxuries...
On the other hand, you have Nordhavns and the like, with a lot of inside room for the size, not so efficient forms and higher HP/D ratios. Expensive also.

And if you go long range, you build everything with proper scantlings...

Here some simple parameters for the Oceanis 36 Cc
D/L = 197,47
SA/D = 18,02
HP/D = 2.48 (Asuming 85% of the 39 HP of the Volvo Penta 2040)
HSPD = 7,48 Kn
CSF = 2,1
MCR = 21,77
SSV = 57,1
AVS = 118,49 º

So, with a CSF of 2,1 and a MCR of 21,77 I wouldn't say this is an all weather long range cruiser at all!
This is a boat with good weather islands hopping or coast pottering in mind. Absolutely respectable, but it is what it is.

As I said before, we shoud be comparing eggies with eggies....sorry, Paulo

(P.S.: Just to clarify: I define 'Eggies' as round, white and fragile boats...)

[Vega]

Originally Posted by fcfc

I do not agree with this. So how do JM Tanton TAMETA ( http://www.boatdesign.net/gallery/sh...big/perpage/12 ) or JB Brouns JMF39 ( listed in a previous post ) to get their stability and seaworthiness, since they have about the same weight as an Oceanis ?
.

This is a nice boat, but not an oceangoing boat. Probably not even a class B boat. Nothing wrong with that, it is impossible to do otherwise.
As I have said, weight in a relatively small oceancoing motorboat is needed not only to major its stability but also because the boat will have to carry huge quantities of fuel and water, and that is impossible in a light boat.

[Vega]

Originally Posted by Guillermo

If they carry a lot of fuel and they have to be fuel efficient, so with a low HP/D ratio, and at the same time reach a reasonable cruising speed, we only get this with long, narrow boats. We'd go well up of 50' for such a boat.
On the other hand, you have Nordhavns and the like, with a lot of inside room for the size, not so efficient forms and higher HP/D ratios. Expensive also.

Considering ocean going motorboats, a trawler type can be a lot smaller, compared with a long and narrow boat, simply because its superior beam gives it a lot more form stability. For the same reason (beam and form stability), motorcats are the only motorboats that don’t have to be really heavy.

[quote=Guillermo]

Guillermo, get your spectacles, cause you are making a lot of confusions.

I never talked about the Oceanis 36, but only about the 39ft Oceanis (now called 393).

About all those data that you like to post, the really important one is not there. Post the RM curves and that will show us what is the force necessary to capsize all those boats, let us see what is the inverted stability and the real AVS, not a program calculated one that is often grossly inaccurate.

The Oceanis 39 is a completely different boat, It is 42% heavier than the 36, has a much bigger AVS and almost 50% larger RM values. Nothing to do really.

Sorry Guillermo

[Guillermo]

Data for Oceanis 390

D/L = 173,38 (Even lighter than the 36, proportionally!)
SA/D = 16,63
HP/D = 2,96 (85% of Perkins 50 HP as mounted in several units)
HSPD = 7,73 Kn
CSF = 2,11
MCR = 21,23
AVS = 119,62º

Neither a great deal of a boat, with 2,11 CSF and 21,23 MCR. Just another chap-a-potting eggy, from my point of view.

Data for the 393 Clipper

D/L = 177,63
SA/D = 14,75
HP/D = 3,15
HSPD = 7,94 Kn
CSF = 2,02
MCR = 24,03
AVS = 118,87 º

Same thing, same philosophy, conceived for the chartering market, not serious cruising (That's why wise owners cross with ARC!).

You said: "Post the RM curves..." You do it, please, and we'll discuss them. I'm not able to find them even at Beneteau's site. And I understand them: What on earth do the chartering people need the RM curves for...?

And, Paulo: HP/D being almost 3 or even bigger makes these boats real (and even overpowered!) motorsailers. I thought you was banning them out of here!

[Vega]

Originally Posted by Guillermo

Data for Oceanis 390

D/L = 173,38
SA/D = 16,63
HP/D = 2,96 (85% of Perkins 50 HP as mounted in several units)
HSPD = 7,73 Kn
CSF = 2,11
MCR = 21,23
AVS = 119,62º

Neither a great deal of a boat, with 2,11 CSF and 21,23 MCR. Just another chap-a-potting eggy, from my point of view.

That computed generated data that you insist in posting is almost meaningless and can be grossly inaccurate, for instance the AVS that you have posted for the 36CC was 118,87º.The real value (not a computer generated one) is 126º and that is a huge
difference.

Regarding seaworthiness and stability, the best overall Index is the Stix number (not a computer generated one). The oceanis 36cc has a Stix number of 35, the Oceanis 393 has a Stix number of 43.

That’s a little bit like comparing the seaworthiness of two similarly designed boats (hull form) one with 35ft, the other with 43ft. It has nothing to do. Big, big difference.

Actually a Stix of 43 for a 39 boat is a very good number, a number that you wouldn’t expect on a 39ft Beneteau.