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

[Seafarer24]

Standing rigging only costs money to maintain and replace if you have it. Do away with the standing rigging and run free-standing spars, and you'll do away with considerable expense and complexity.

Sails are only expensive if they're complex designs, and/or for a large boat. Cruising sails don't need to work at peak efficiency, and can last a rather long time if properly maintained. Most of that maintenance is not difficult to do, and the owner can handle it. It's not hard for the owner to make a Chinese Lug sail either (Junk sail) as these are simple rectangular sections. They can perform well, and are set on free-standing masts
( www.brandadventures.net )

I was aboard 1976 Freedom 40 #1 earlier this year. It's aluminum free-standing masts are still in use, its sails are 10 years old and still serviceable. It got its first engine (a 70HP outboard) in 1998. If I had the money I'd have bought that boat in a heartbeat. Comfortable, low-maintance, good-performing boats don't come around every day.
( www.seafarer-research-center.com/modesty.htm )

You can't say "which is more economical" and then compare two brand-new high-tech machines that were never designed to be economical in the first place.

[Willallison]

Fred, Seafareer, Greenseas - I find myself now agreeing with all three of you
The KISS principle can indeed be applied to boats, both power and sail - you won't find paravanes etc on a lifeboat, for instance...
I must return you all to my comments that sparked this thread -

It's a mistake to think that buying a sailboat will save you money. Many times I've seen the results of studies that show that a full displacement power boat is indeed less costly to buy and own.

and then a further clarification -

without wanting to hijack this thread, or turn it into a sail vs power debate - I'm not suggesting that it's always less expensive to own a powerboat, just that it's certainly not always the opposite..... buying, owning and operating a boat (as I know you are well aware) is about a lot more than the cost of fuel.

It's also worth remembering, as other have noted, that VERY few people use their vessels to cross oceans. Most are content to slip down the coast for a night or two of R&R in a quiet anchorage. For these people, storm shutters, watermakers, stabilisers etc etc are completely irrelevant.

[FAST FRED]

For these people, storm shutters, watermakers, stabilisers etc etc are completely irrelevant.

For them a 13ft Boston Whaler with tent would be an inexpensive choice.

12 volt Adler/Barbour refrigeration systems were actually first designed for long range cruising vessels and draw the least current of any similar units.

NOT SO! The origonal CRUISING A/B system was a cold plate (Eutetic plate) and modified York air cond compressor and engine drive..
This is very sucessfull , our own setup has 6 inches of insulation and dual 0-F coldplates.
We run the engine 2 hours every 3rd day and maintain +5F in the freezer.

The DC version was started for the weekend folks who needed a night or two "on the hook" , with all the comforts.

Today the cold plate syatem MAY have been surpassed by the electric versions , but not for long range cruising.

DEAD batts are the usual problem , and UNREPAIRABLE by an owner or local fridge guy is another.

The Coldplate System is similar enough to any auto air cond that most anyone can repair it. The system comes with an Owner Troubbleshooting guide that has saved many a full freezer in West Nowhere..

I worked for A/B in the 70's so am familiar with the units, and the company history.

FAST FRED

[Greenseas2]

Thanks for the clarification Fred. I've seen a few engine driven systems, but also believe that they are for boats with larger horse power. Recently I have also read about an electronic cold plate system and will go back and try to find the article. Your comment about 6 inches of inulation is quite right. We doubled the insulation in our cold box and it made a big difference. Not quite 6 inches though. Dead batteries are more of a function of not having a power budget for the boat than failing batteries. I would say that only about 1 in 100 boaters, or less, know how much each item's current draw is and fewer have, or pay attention to battery monitoring equpiment. For the long distance cruise, this is crucial.

[Vega]

Originally Posted by fcfc

You do not have to pay it as extra, but you have to pay it. You pay the lead in the ballast, you pay the bottom structure, you pay the draft in your marina fees, you pay the lack of speed.

you pay the Draft in marina fees? That is new to me…it’s a French thing?

With so many extra things to pay I can not understand why I can not find a production cruiser motorboat that costs less than the double of what costs the Oceanis, and that one is not even the budget priced oriented line of sailboats from Beneteau.

Originally Posted by fcfc

For motorboats, you can pay the seaworthiness as an extra. The huge majority is not interested by seaworthiness beyond force 4-5.

I guess that French motorboaters (for example) are not interested in the best and most beautiful French cruising grounds. I mean Corse. For that you have to make a small passage (100 m) ruled by the “Mistral”. That one can appear without any weather forecast warning, really from nowhere, with blue skies and all. You can have a force 7 to 9 in few hours.
And of course, it is illegal to try that passage in a class C boat (if you have any problem your insurance will stay out of it).

What a pity.

Originally Posted by fcfc

By force 6 or 7, most leisure boaters do think it is no longer a leisure, and go to the nearest shelter if they are at sea.

Yes I agree, but if you are cruising (Corse, Balearic Islands, Sardinia etc), you can be 50 miles away from any shelter, and in a Class C boat, there is a possibility that you may not be able to make it, not to mention that the shore is the worst place to turn to when things get really bad

[FAST FRED]

"Dead batteries are more of a function of not having a power budget for the boat than failing batteries."

In our experience a lack of understanding and being CHEAP is the cause for most dead batt systems.

An E-meter or Link 1000 will tell anyone the EXACT state of charge in their batt setup , but at $200. not many folks understand how much money is saved by NOT killing the batteries annually.

Most folks also cheap out on the recharge side , and expect a car alternator to handle deep cycle house batteries.
Sure it WILL, if you have 10 or more hours of motoring each and every day.

A 3 or 4 stage Voltage regulator also is $200 , so seldome seen.

You are correct that most folks don't have any clues to their electric consumption ,
but a good meter and a good recharge system will save them from their lack of interest.
IF they will $pend the ca$h.

FAST FRED

[Willallison]

Ok - I'm going to bang the 1st nail into the coffin of the argument of the cost of sail over power... though even I was surprised by the difference he suggests!
Steve Dashew was kind enough to respond to my email. For those not familiar with his 'work', visit www.setsail.com

Hi Will:



Interesting question. We studied operating costs quite carefully when designing our present FPB 83. This is a slender, 83’ ocean crossing motor yacht which is very efficient. We compared this design with Beowulf, a 78’ high performance cruising ketch.



Using diesel at a cost of US$2.25/US Gallon, the operating cost of the motor yacht is about 60% of the cost of the sailing vessel when all things are considered. For sail these include replacement of sails, running rigging, sail maintenance, and occasional maintenance on the spars and standing rigging, winches and deck hardware. For the motor vessel we include fuel, oil, maintenance, and replacement of engine and gearbox at 20,000 hours (although tghey should be good for 30,000 hours).



The costs will vary a little with higher fuel. At US$3.00 per US Gallon the motor yacht costs about 75% of the sailing vessel’s cost per mile. Ore, one can slow down from 11 to 10.3 knots and the ratio would remain the same.



For smaller sailing yachts the costs would be closer as the sails could be used for a longer period.



Hope this helps.



Regards – Steve Dashew



PS-we have been averaging US 7.4 gallons per hour at 11 knots for propulsion, hydraulics, and the generation of electricity, running at 11 to 11.5 knots, usually with some head wind and head seas.

The boats that Steve refers to are both at the premium end of the market of course, but I'd be surprised if there were anyone more qualified to make the comparison.

[Ari]

Originally Posted by Willallison

Ok - I'm going to bang the 1st nail into the coffin of the argument of the cost of sail over power... though even I was surprised by the difference he suggests!
Steve Dashew was kind enough to respond to my email. For those not familiar with his 'work', visit www.setsail.com



The boats that Steve refers to are both at the premium end of the market of course, but I'd be surprised if there were anyone more qualified to make the comparison.

Sorry I need some explanation, 60% of the cost or 75 % of the cost meant it will cost less to run or more..?

[Willallison]

The power boat will cost 60% LESS to run than the sail boat

[SheetWise]

Willallison --

He wrote that the operating cost will be 60-75% of sail -- this translates to 40% less for power at US $2.25 gallon and 25% less at $3 gallon.

[Willallison]

Yes - sorry - wrote that in a hurry - you're quite right... 60% of the cost of sail

[Vega]

Originally Posted by Willallison, quoting Steve Dashew

Interesting question. We studied operating costs quite carefully when designing our present FPB 83. This is a slender, 83’ ocean crossing motor yacht which is very efficient. We compared this design with Beowulf, a 78’ high performance cruising ketch.
Using diesel at a cost of US$2.25/US Gallon, the operating cost of the motor yacht is about 60% of the cost of the sailing vessel when all things are considered. ….

The costs will vary a little with higher fuel. At US$3.00 per US Gallon the motor yacht costs about 75% of the sailing vessel’s cost per mile. Ore, one can slow down from 11 to 10.3 knots and the ratio would remain the same.

For smaller sailing yachts the costs would be closer as the sails could be used for a longer period,....

Originally Posted by Willallison

Ok - I'm going to bang the 1st nail into the coffin of the argument of the cost of sail over power... though even I was surprised by
.......The boats that Steve refers to are both at the premium end of the market of course,....

I don’t see what a 83 ft (or a 78ft) boat has to do with economy while cruising.

Remember that the purpose of this thread is to see in what kind of boat (sailing or motor) cruising is less expensive and if someone is concerned about this, it is because he is not rich.

Anyway you can say to Mr Dashew not to cruise in Europe, because here a US/Gallon of fuel costs about US$4.84

With his own calculations and parameters, a motorboat would be now about 12% more expensive…and the cost of diesel is not going to come down. I would say that you should expect a 20% to 50% increase in the next 10 years, so that difference towards the sailing boat is going to be very, very substantial, not only here, but anywhere…..But anyway this is hardly of any importance for the owner of a 84ft “at the premium end of the market.”

Of course, it would be very interesting if you could obtain the parameters that Mr Dashew had used on his calculations. Perhaps they can be of some use, regarding the use of an adequately modestly sized boat (40ft), for economical cruising even if it is not really needed.

The only thing that is needed is that you, or any of the cruising motorboaters, chose in the world Market, the boat that we will compare with the Oceanis.

The methodology is quite simple and it is the one that is widely used in auto magazines to compare the price of each mile, for each car.

We will begin with the initial price of the boat, consider a 10 year (or 15, if you want) time period, have a difference between initial price and the resale value of the boat (considering the actual resale % value, between the cost of a new boat and a 10 year old boat) and the number you get is the cost of having that boat for 10 years without using it , out of the water.

Now we can, and it will not be difficult, make the cost calculations for different kinds of uses.
I will say four mileages/year: 500 miles/year, 1500 miles/year, 5000 miles/year and 10 000 miles a year.

And then we will see about those nails.

I am still waiting for that boat, but now I am so curious that if someone is not capable of having a better option, I will do the calculations with that Dutch boat, the Sturier 40 (when I have the time).

[Vega]

It will be this 40ft?

Nice boat

[Willallison]

I don’t see what a 83 ft (or a 78ft) boat has to do with economy while cruising.

Remember that the purpose of this thread is to see in what kind of boat (sailing or motor) cruising is less expensive and if someone is concerned about this, it is because he is not rich.

I beg to differ. Whilst you started this thread - and as such it is up to you the parameters of the discussion - it was as a result of some comments that I made. I think that they are worth repeating (again ).

without wanting to hijack this thread, or turn it into a sail vs power debate - I'm not suggesting that it's always less expensive to own a powerboat, just that it's certainly not always the opposite..... buying, owning and operating a boat (as I know you are well aware) is about a lot more than the cost of fuel.

No mention of size or quality of the boat, just a simple statement.
In Steve Dashew's case, power has indeed proved to be less expensive than sail.
You make a good point about the difference in the cost of fuel from one region to another. Though it's important also to remember that the Dashew's included far more than just fuel costs in their comparisons. It would indeed be interesting to know a bit more about their method of comparison - particularly what proportion of the costs were for fuel. I'm a little hesitant to ask though - I don't want to pester these guys!

In terms of choosing a powerboat that can sensibly compete against the Oceanis that you put forward, sadly I simply haven't had the time to give it any serious consideration
By the look of the boat you last suggested it is one of the smaller Selene's (?) and I suspect it is a semi-displacement boat, so as such would not be sensible choice. One of the problems is in finding a displacement boat that is aimed at this end of the market - most come standard as quite highly spec'd boats that are aimed more towards the premium end. I will make a point of trying to find one, I promise - I just can't say when...

[Ari]

Will, I don't know about the others..thank you from me for putting in that comparison from Steve Dashew.That size of boats might be too big for some, but that info suit me well. If there is detail comparison of smaller size..it'll be better.