Minimum Passagemaker/Cruiser

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by mydauphin, Sep 29, 2010.


What is minimum that you can handle?

Poll closed Oct 29, 2010.
  1. I can only live in a proper yacht

    2 vote(s)
  2. Need: Size between 40 and 50 feet

    8 vote(s)
  3. Need: Size between 30 and 40 feet

    15 vote(s)
  4. Need: Size smaller than 30 feet ok

    8 vote(s)
  5. Need: Power

    22 vote(s)
  6. Need: Sail

    19 vote(s)
  7. Need: Single Engine

    24 vote(s)
  8. Need: Twin Engine

    5 vote(s)
  9. Need: Head and holding tank

    26 vote(s)
  10. Need: Air conditioner and Generator

    7 vote(s)
  11. Need: Watermaker

    15 vote(s)
  12. I don't care if interior looks like my garage

    8 vote(s)
  13. Need: DC Power Only

    15 vote(s)
  14. Need: Carpeting

    4 vote(s)
  15. Need: Wood floors

    9 vote(s)
  16. Need: Satellite TV

    3 vote(s)
  17. Need: Internet

    13 vote(s)
  18. Need: Hot Water Shower

    18 vote(s)
  19. Need: Manual Bilge pumps

    17 vote(s)
  20. Need: Propane Stove

    16 vote(s)
  21. Need: Freezer

    12 vote(s)
  22. Need: A boat that won't shame me at the marina.

    12 vote(s)
  23. Need: Windlass

    18 vote(s)
  24. Need: Dingy

    26 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Maddie
    Joined: Jan 2010
    Posts: 16
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 17
    Location: Trinidad & Tobago

    Maddie Junior Member

    Are you unable to read.

    You clearly said "minimum size" NOT "sensible size"

    Believe me, the 20m ballpark I mentioned so often, is about the minimum size for a ocean crossing motoryacht

    I believe individuals should be allowed to change their mind as new information becomes available. Its OK.

    You now seem to be reducing your minimum size and pretending you never stated otherwise. (This is speculation by me)

    I'm upset because you continually verbally abuse anyone who disagrees with your values.
  2. Pierre R
    Joined: May 2007
    Posts: 461
    Likes: 32, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 458
    Location: ohio, USA

    Pierre R Senior Member

    I agree with Richard on the 50'-60' requirement for a passagemaker. Especially a poor man's passagemaker. The price of a boat is pretty much proportional to the displacement of the vessel. Weight costs money. Weight also costs money to move and maintain.

    There are two schools of thought here. Heavy fat, slow and skinny, long. The Nordhavn 40 (12m) is an example of heavy fat and slow. She is 22 tons on a waterline of roughly 36' (11m). Her D/L is around 500. In order to cross oceans she is very slow on the order of around 6 knots without currents. Because she is so slow and short she needs to weigh a lot in order to carry the provisions. Weighing a lot makes her NOT CHEAP FOR WHAT YOU GET so just because she is short does not make her a poor mans crosser.

    When it comes to really looking at what it takes for a poor man's passagemaker it takes going further on the same amount of fuel without increasing weight. That means longer water lines and a narrower boat.

    The other example used here is Idlewild. Idlewild is 55' (17m) and 14 tones. A far cheaper boat to build than the Nordhavn 40 and far cheaper to operate. Idlewild could have been built as the near perfect poor man's passagemaker but for one requirement in her SOR. The owner wanted to boat to be able to be transported by truck from where she was built to central Alberta Canada and be able to navigate down the Athabaska river to the Artic Ocean. In my opinion this requirement runined the possibility of making her a truely comfortable boat for passagemaking.

    She should have had her lines softened a bit more, drafted a bit deeper, had a CPP propeller and slightly more power for safety. This would have produced a better ride and allowed for carrying the fuel in tanks under the floors and a far better layout as a result.

    As far as I can see, the only way to produce a poor man's passagemaker is to go over 50', stay narrow and relatively light. It's very difficult to do that on less the 50'. The overall costs of a shorter boat design always rises above the 50 foot plus boat design. Dockage is the only drawback and a poor man's passagemaker is primarily going to anchor out. After all we are talking low budget crusing.
    1 person likes this.
  3. fcfc
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 779
    Likes: 29, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: france,europe

    fcfc Senior Member

  4. TeddyDiver
    Joined: Dec 2007
    Posts: 2,579
    Likes: 123, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 1650
    Location: Finland/Norway

    TeddyDiver Gollywobbler

    ??? Sorry but what two used, the other one double the age of the another has to do with your question :confused:
  5. fcfc
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 779
    Likes: 29, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: france,europe

    fcfc Senior Member

  6. goodwilltoall
    Joined: Jul 2010
    Posts: 837
    Likes: 25, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 31
    Location: nation of Ohio

    goodwilltoall Senior Member


    Idlewood is a good passagemaker except for the high deckhouse and freeboard, this is what caused the excessive rolling during the South Ocean crossing. For long boats those two things should be kept at 60% of beam.
    Other than that it proved successful.

    Idlewood has been on the market for years and unrealistically priced for its size.

  7. apex1

    apex1 Guest

    You should have the "quote" button disabled, because you regularely cheat when quoting.

    Here the post:

    You are upset? So, you feel fine to limit your contribution to attacks, instead of providing your opinion on the topic, but feel insulted when I call your offense what it is?

    Grow up, Dude.


    thank you, for expressing.
    Problem is, that most readers here don´t grasp what length means, and automatically associate with cost.
    Of course Idlewild was cheaper, and could have been far cheaper than the mentioned N-havn. Unfortunately they converted a poor design into a very poor design, and then they built it in expensive Al. Opposite to goodwillies belief she is not a good boat for the purpose, just at the lowest end of being sufficient.

    1 person likes this.
  8. Pierre R
    Joined: May 2007
    Posts: 461
    Likes: 32, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 458
    Location: ohio, USA

    Pierre R Senior Member

    Where do you get this stuff from. Do you just pull it out of thin air? Deckhouse and freeboard by themselves mean nothing. The overall design is everything. She rolled like mad because she had a large waterplane with little grip in the water. Something your design will do big time.
  9. Pierre R
    Joined: May 2007
    Posts: 461
    Likes: 32, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 458
    Location: ohio, USA

    Pierre R Senior Member

    Why do you have trouble understanding that a 30,000 lb simple boat is cheaper to build than a 50,000 lb floating condo? The asking price on the 1999 Nordhavn 40 is $425,000. You play your cards right and you could have a decent poor man's passagemaker Idlewild's size built for that brand new.
  10. Tad
    Joined: Mar 2002
    Posts: 2,306
    Likes: 191, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 2281
    Location: Flattop Islands

    Tad Boat Designer

    Idlewild has been actively for sale for 5+ years now, she is currently listed at $350k Canadian dollars, they started at $500k......and asking is far different than selling price these days......I would guess she will sell for any substantial offer...half asking or less

    When evaluating subjective statements about motion, take into consideration the persons experience.....motion is evaluated relative to something.....The owners of Idlewild have owned and cruised only one boat......fully loaded her motion may damp out very quickly, we don't know......

    And her bare shell, with electrical, engine, tanks, windows, interior, was just over $300k in 2004....which is why she has not sold....price is wrong for what you get.....and the fact is that folks who want to cross oceans at 6 knots, only want to do so in a Nordhavn 62.....
    1 person likes this.
  11. larry larisky

    larry larisky Previous Member

    from whom you took this rule?
    just interested.
    we see a lot of rule come and goes with the time, that i will be interested who define this one.
    please don't take it personally.
    thank you
  12. MatthewDS
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 104
    Likes: 3, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 48
    Location: Juneau, Alaska

    MatthewDS Senior Member

    You are wrong. You keep spouting these rules and I can only imagine that you are misinterpreting something you read somewhere, or making them up to bolster your "Jubilee" boat fantasy.
  13. Chuck Losness
    Joined: Apr 2008
    Posts: 311
    Likes: 39, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 135
    Location: Central CA

    Chuck Losness Senior Member

    Reluctant to post here because this is another thread that seems to have degenerated into mindless argument. But here goes.
    I did some checking on my nav program for the maximum distance between ports that you would have travel to power around the world. Could you do longer passages if you wanted to? Yes. But you wouldn't need to based upon my research. The longest passage without a port to stop at to refuel that I found was from Southern California to Hawaii. This is around 2,200 miles. There were some other passages that were close to this particularly in the southern Atlantic and the Indian ocean but this was the longest that I found without a port to refuel. This wouldn't be the most direct route but you could do it.
    Tad's Passagermaker Lite 39 holds 650 gallons of fuel and can carry more than sufficient provisions for 30 to 60 days. Food is heavy but not that heavy. My references on provisioning for long passages indicate that food stores would not exceed 1000 pounds and would probably be under 500 pounds not including water. Water is not the issue that it used to be since the advent of watermakers. I think that this is a realistic example of a minimal size passagemaker. I am sure that there are others.
    Traveling at 6 knots you would burn 1 gph. I have a similar size and displacement sailboat and this is the amount of fuel that I burn when I am under power only with no assist from sails. My sailboat is equipped with a Perkins 4108. 40 horsepower. If anyone would like to see my fuel usage log I'll gladly share it. 1 gph at 6 knots gives you a range of 3,600 miles with 650 gallons of fuel. That's a 50% fuel reserve.
    Would this boat be as comfortable as a larger boat? No. Would it be as comfortable as your typical world cruising sailboat in this size range? Yes.
    So I think that this is a doable concept and not just some hare brained pipe dream.

    Attached Files:

  14. michael pierzga
    Joined: Dec 2008
    Posts: 4,862
    Likes: 115, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1180
    Location: spain

    michael pierzga Senior Member

    Ya Chuck, thats a nice looking boat. Like all boats at sea you are subject to roll induced by seas. The problem with motorboats offshore is their roll. Various strategies can be deployed to overcome this roll. Sailboats are naturally stabilized...underwater via the keel and appendages and aloft via sails and mast. Next to me at the moment is a very nice old Dutch built double ended steel motoryacht. Twin gardiner diesels using about 30 liters per hour at cruising...owner told me cruise was at 9 knots, the vessel carries fin stabilizers to dampen roll. These fin stabalizers are expensive high maintenance gear. .

  15. Chuck Losness
    Joined: Apr 2008
    Posts: 311
    Likes: 39, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 135
    Location: Central CA

    Chuck Losness Senior Member

    Hi Michael,
    Roll issues on powerboats are not limited to being offshore. It is just as relevant to a coastal cruiser as it is to a passagemaker. Maybe more so. Here in the Sea of Cortez we get short period, steep wind generated waves that can really throw you around. Imagine a 5' wave with a 3 second period. Not fun. Even the big ferries sometimes have to stay in port. This is a design issue with several different possible solutions. Just another reason why boats should be designed by experienced NA's.
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.