Minimum Cruising Range Needed to Cruise all Areas

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by sgunes

The question related to distances is: if you do not get an ocean-crossing vessel (>3000nm range), what would the minimum range be to cruise: Caribbean (probably just 200-300nm), Alaska (about the same as mentioned in another response).
I can look at Google Maps and check out distances but what I need is info regarding harbors and re-fueling stations. I assume that the biggest distances are in French Polynesia and I would like some input from people who actually have been there.

If you don't like or understand my question, please don't waste your time with a non-response. Thanks.

Range is only one aspect of motor cruising. There is a lot of tension between such values as seakeeping ability, stability, planing ability, speed, cost, etc. Ocean crossing power boats are built to a completely different set of values. Most power cruisers do short coastal passages at relatively high speed in benign conditions (and IMHO that is the optimum model for power cruising). Over a F5 or so, they wait for a weather window, then point and squirt. For this style of cruising, you need a different type of boat than what you need for long passages in different weather. But if you need to be at sea in F7 or over, you will not want to be in any power boat if you can avoid it, unless it's a 120' Feadship with hydraulic stabilizers, or one of Dashew's boats.

Have a look at power cats. In my opinion, this configuration has some overwhelming advantages for moderate size power cruisers (even if I don't much like sail cats).

[BandB]

Originally Posted by sgunes

Thanks for your valuable input.

Regarding budget, I was figuring between $500K to $750K depending if it is a smaller/used or larger/new boat.
I liked the pricing on the Fountaine-Pajot Summerland 40LC power catamarans which have about 1300nm range and start at Euro 380K. Fully equipped it would probably be around $500K.
As a cruising couple that should be big enough. The range should be enough for all areas and after doing Alaska and Carribeans, I may ship it from the East Coast to Europe one day and cruise there for months. The next step would be shipping it from Europe to Thailand/French Polynesia and then back to US. So I think the maximum would be about 3 shipping segments. It looks like overall the shipping/local leasing option would be cheaper and probably safer.

What's the impression of monohulls versus catamarans. The cats claim better stability and fuels savings on top of less draft (good for Caribbeans).
Is that a discussion for a separate post?

You will see that catamarans are a lot more popular with sail boat owners than with power boat owners. The arguments generally given for them are exactly as you said. I've known people who had power cats for the Great Loop and swore it was the only way to go.

On the other hand, for coastal cruising, monohull's are generally smoother riding than cats. Note that I'm only discussing power in this post as I think for sailing the considerations are different. You're comparing cats now to some sizable trawlers and the advantage the trawlers also hold is the interior capacity. Staterooms are generally larger. You're just not working with the limitations of the cat.

Now to the specific cat you're looking at versus say a Nordhavn 43', I love the Cumberland's deck spaces and outdoor living areas. For good weather, what a magnificent boat to be on. However, the Nordhavn's staterooms are obviously bigger. But then you have to decide which is important. If I was crossing oceans, I'd choose the Nordhavn over the Cat. But cruising in good weather and anchoring though the Summerland is very special.

All boats have compromises. If I found myself undecided between the two, I'd take my time and perhaps charter similar if not the same. I know Moorings has a lot of Power Catamarans. I'm sure others do as well.

As to the stability issue, a couple of things. I'd say the Catamaran has the advantage over a non-stabilized monohull, especially at anchor. But most power boaters going in that size boat either have stabilizers or use paravanes.

One other thing you will hear cited as a negative on the Cat is finding slips in marinas. Yes the 47' has a 21.63' beam. That's no larger than any powerboat over 80' or so. Typically it will lead in the US to a side tie or t-slip. But that's the way a tremendous part of transient docking is for everyone. Very seldom would that be a real problem. It just means you can't pull into a slip other 47' might but I wouldn't let that sway me against it.

[BandB]

One more Greenline note. The best evaluation may be those who bought them. Unfortunately, we don't have a survey of them. But there's one source of information that I find somewhat disturbing. That's on Yacht World and the fact that although basically four years old (earliest model listed is 2010) there are 21 Greenline's listed for sale. So 21 people have voted not to keep it. I don't think you'll find so many very recent models for sale of very many other boats.

[sgunes]

Originally Posted by BandB

One more Greenline note. The best evaluation may be those who bought them. Unfortunately, we don't have a survey of them. But there's one source of information that I find somewhat disturbing. That's on Yacht World and the fact that although basically four years old (earliest model listed is 2010) there are 21 Greenline's listed for sale. So 21 people have voted not to keep it. I don't think you'll find so many very recent models for sale of very many other boats.

At this point the Greenline's are out.
Maybe they will improve in 5 years (higher efficiency solar panels, better battery technology) but only time will tell.

Like you, I am leaning towards the Fountaine-Pajot Summerland 40 LC as an option for extended cruising without crossing any oceans. The price seems reasonable and it is a well-known manufacturer. The Summerland 40 LC has a 17'7" beam.
http://www.passagemaker.com/articles...mmerland-40lc/
I may consider leasing it for a week or two to get a feeling for it.

Thanks everyone for the valuable input.
I will be back closer to retirement.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by sgunes

At this point the Greenline's are out.
Maybe they will improve in 5 years (higher efficiency solar panels, better battery technology) but only time will tell.

Like you, I am leaning towards the Fountaine-Pajot Summerland 40 LC as an option for extended cruising without crossing any oceans. The price seems reasonable and it is a well-known manufacturer. The Summerland 40 LC has a 17'7" beam.
SUMMERTIME: Testing Fountaine Pajot’s New Summerland 40LC | PassageMaker
I may consider leasing it for a week or two to get a feeling for it.

Thanks everyone for the valuable input.
I will be back closer to retirement.

I was quoting the beam of the larger Summerland, which I would strongly consider if going with Summerland. Not my style or preference of boat, but actually very impressed by it for near coastal cruising.

[chris_gee]

I am not sure what you mean by or include in French Polynesia. The longest passage most will make is Galapagos to the Marquesas 2971 miles.
Subsequently most passages are shorter say up to 1500 miles.
One might allow for contingencies.

[boatman61]

1/3rd more than the longest passage your considering... and 2 engines are better than one..
For economy.. rotate in benign conditions..

[goboatingnow]

I personally think , that a good fast ( 20 kts+) power boat ( preferably semi-displacement ) , with about 250-300 nm range on two big twin diesels, gives one a very versatile boat. Able to handle reasonable weather, but good at covering distance when you get those windows.

I fail to see the point about long distance, slow mobos, all the disadvantages of a monohull sailing vessel and none of the advantages, whats the point. ( and given the tiny market, I think most agree with me )


dave

[sgunes]

Originally Posted by chris_gee

I am not sure what you mean by or include in French Polynesia. The longest passage most will make is Galapagos to the Marquesas 2971 miles.
Subsequently most passages are shorter say up to 1500 miles.
One might allow for contingencies.

Galapagos, Easter Island, Hawaii would be impossible in anything less than the heavy-duty long distance cruisers.
Looking at doable distances it would be possible to ship the boat to Australia and then Island hop in Oceania/South Pacific as the biggest distance seems to be about 1100nm (Australia to New Zealand).
You can also travel up the Australian East Coast towards Raja Ampat and Thailand doing shorter hops.

[sgunes]

I just checked the Galapagos and they seem to be just about 800nm from Costa Rica.
So Galapagos would actually be doable (with less than 1000nm range) but not Easter Island or Hawaii.

[Stumble]

Sgunes,

Be careful about quoted ranges. With the exception of the Dashew boats manufacturers are famous for quoting ranges based on fuel usage at light ship. By the time you add on full fuel, water, ect figure you will loose 20% of your quoted range plus a reserve. Dashew quotes what he thinks the boats will actually get in use then tests them. The FPB for instance has actually done 7000+nm on one tank of fuel.

The other concern is that generators burn a substantial amount of fuel, and many large boats are dependent on them. Figure this will burn 10-20 gallons/day depending on how long you run it for. This is the other thing large fuel reserves are useful for. Getting somewhere is just half the issue, the other is how long you want to stay there. Fast cruisers typically a weekender or week long trip makers not duration cruisers. If you are going to sleep with the AC on then you need to count on at least 10 gallons/day on station plus the round trip burn. On many boats this doesn't leave more than 7-10 days you can be independent of a fuel dock.

Here a power cat does offer a nice option, since the top deck can be turned into a solar collector extending on site power availability.

[sgunes]

Originally Posted by Stumble

Sgunes,

Be careful about quoted ranges. With the exception of the Dashew boats manufacturers are famous for quoting ranges based on fuel usage at light ship. By the time you add on full fuel, water, ect figure you will loose 20% of your quoted range plus a reserve. Dashew quotes what he thinks the boats will actually get in use then tests them. The FPB for instance has actually done 7000+nm on one tank of fuel.

The other concern is that generators burn a substantial amount of fuel, and many large boats are dependent on them. Figure this will burn 10-20 gallons/day depending on how long you run it for. This is the other thing large fuel reserves are useful for. Getting somewhere is just half the issue, the other is how long you want to stay there. Fast cruisers typically a weekender or week long trip makers not duration cruisers. If you are going to sleep with the AC on then you need to count on at least 10 gallons/day on station plus the round trip burn. On many boats this doesn't leave more than 7-10 days you can be independent of a fuel dock.

Here a power cat does offer a nice option, since the top deck can be turned into a solar collector extending on site power availability.

I agree. The F-P Cumberland 47 LC offers factory-installed solar panels which should help minimizing fuel use by the generator.

I also read about the Beneteau Swifttrawlers which can cruise fuel-efficient at 7-8 knots or speed up to escape bad weather.
What is their reputation in the boating community?
The 44 seems to be a good size for a cruising couple.

Beneteau.com Swift Trawler - Powered By Beneteau Swift Trawler 34 / Swift Trawler / Motorboats - BENETEAU Beneteau Swift Trawler 34

Swift Trawler 44 / Swift Trawler / Motorboats - BENETEAU Swift Trawler - Powered By Beneteau BeneteauÂ*Swift 44 (2014-)Â*2011Â* Reviews,performance,compare,price,warranty, specs,Reports,Specifications Layout, video | BoatTEST.com

Swift Trawler 50 / Swift Trawler / Motorboats - BENETEAU

[BandB]

Originally Posted by sgunes

I agree. The F-P Cumberland 47 LC offers factory-installed solar panels which should help minimizing fuel use by the generator.

I also read about the Beneteau Swifttrawlers which can cruise fuel-efficient at 7-8 knots or speed up to escape bad weather.
What is their reputation in the boating community?
The 44 seems to be a good size for a cruising couple.

Beneteau.com Swift Trawler - Powered By Beneteau Swift Trawler 34 / Swift Trawler / Motorboats - BENETEAU Beneteau Swift Trawler 34

Swift Trawler 44 / Swift Trawler / Motorboats - BENETEAU Swift Trawler - Powered By Beneteau BeneteauÂ*Swift 44 (2014-)Â*2011Â* Reviews,performance,compare,price,warranty, specs,Reports,Specifications Layout, video | BoatTEST.com

Swift Trawler 50 / Swift Trawler / Motorboats - BENETEAU

Their reputation is very mixed. Many owners of them absolutely love them. On the other hand some criticize them for what they aren't and that is a rough water boat. Have their share of workmanship issues on delivery. Seems to be a great option as a loop boat but not so great for coastal cruising if you choose offshore instead of ICW.

[Stumble]

Boats that advertise that they can also be operated efficiently at displacement speeds but are capable of high speed operation are by necessity high speed boats. There are major tradeoffs to achieve this type of high end speed which frankly just aren't very valuable to duration cruisers.

In reality these boats work very well for someone who needs to get somewhere for the weekend, and get back in a hurry, but when you don't have to be there later today just whenever we get there it gets very hard to justify spending the fuel bill. Just look at the swift trawler, at low speed cruise you burn 1 gallon/hr@5.7kn for 6miles/gallon. At fast cruise of 22.6kn you burn 22.5gallons/hr and 1.1 miles/gallon.

Is it worth burning six times the fuel to get somewhere? Sure if you are in a hurry, but if you aren't.... There is also a reality that I many sea states you have to slow down no matter what the boat is capable of simply because it is so uncomfortable to take the beating from the waves.

I have a boat very much like the Swift Trawler, and for me it is great because I am on a schedule and the time saved makes the whole trip possible. But every time I fill the boat up I cringe a little bit and wish I had an extra day to take it slow.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by sgunes

The question related to distances is: if you do not get an ocean-crossing vessel (>3000nm range), what would the minimum range be to cruise: Caribbean (probably just 200-300nm), Alaska (about the same as mentioned in another response).
I can look at Google Maps and check out distances but what I need is info regarding harbors and re-fueling stations. I assume that the biggest distances are in French Polynesia and I would like some input from people who actually have been there.

If you don't like or understand my question, please don't waste your time with a non-response. Thanks.

I simply asked a question. This reply explains that you want to know about "harbors and re-fueling stations."

OK, harbors and refueling stations are covered in cruising guides and activecaptain.