Trimaran - Especially Searunner - Owners

[rossad]

Sea Dragon. Smokehouse bay. What a delightful surprise yes you are correct. It is paradise. And I am a lucky guy. But business comes first and time restraints come to the fore. I need to visit more often to great barrier island. Your many question regarding the installation of an outboard. Many of us have thought of the same questions when re installing propulsion. And yes it can all be done but is it better to that of an inboard of the latest tecnology. And I am sorry to tell you but its not. Nore is electric. As much as we want to believe there is a better method to that thumping diesel for our trimarans it doesnt exist yet. the best go forward for this applicaon is yanmar. It is lite small and efficent thats why it is more exsensive to do.

[Mark Johnson]

AUX. POWER OPTIONS: Revisited...

Many of us, myself included, have been avid sailors for over 50 years. We KNOW how to get every ounce of performance out of our Searunners.

The often repeated notion that even for us... having the obvious extra utility and safety of a properly installed, ultra reliable diesel inboard, somehow is a "crutch", or lessens the experience, is elitest ********... Compared to them, "the purist", we can do EVERYTHING that they can, but in NO way can they do everything that we can, (Some things perhaps, with luck & planning, but not everything).

Being able to "crank n run", (within 5 seconds), has saved us from disaster on several occasions, like when circumstances required an IMEDIATE dead to windward coarse to avoid collision!

We have survived numerous hurricanes, in a hidy hole or at anchor, (>12 X), sometimes by careful throttle controlled assist during the gusts.

We have motorsailed into passes through the reef, surfing in conditions of total kayos, only to have to make a HARD turn RIGHT in the middle of the narrow pass. (Ambergris Key Belize)

We have been forced to motor dead to windward, through a long narrow pass (xcilak Mexico), into almost impassable 8' breaking wave conditions, with "0 Gs" on the bow, because our visas had expired, and we HAD to leave.

We have motorsailed for 36 hours, into 40 knots of wind & 14' waves, to beat just 5 degrees tighter, to make landfall in the Dry Tortugas, (after days of beating into a gale from Glovers Reef Belize), a technique which ONLY works with the propwash going past the rudder.

In a pinch, we have turned the boat in place, as required, to clear in "only" at the customs dock, (Trinidad), which was only possible with the propwash going past the rudder. This "turning in place" has also been done 100 other times, when in tight marina basin dockage situations... (Suzanna's Lagoon, Rio Dulce, Guatemala)

We have motored against VERY strong currents in VERY tight places, and up narrow channels, to get to inland utopias. (Through locks, up canals, under bridges, sometimes crabbing in a strong side current)...

We have also chosen the best possible weather window, (8 days from Culebra PR to the Beaufort NC inlet), because we had the fuel "and could" set out motoring into a dead calm the first 36 hours, before the spinnaker took over.

I could list hundreds more cases where we've had a better, safer, "indeed possible" experience while cruising, and a hundred more cases when we went to places we otherwise simply could not, because we had a reliable inboard diesel. WE HAVE MORE OPTIONS! This is a fact...

Those with no engine or a lesser utility OB motor installation, on the other hand, did not get to any more places, or get saved from any more storms at sea. Nor did they pinch tighter, or turn in place in a marina basin. Nor did they knowingly set out into a 2 day calm, or "sail" dead to windward through LONG narrow channels in a reef, into breaking waves during a gale. They didn't have a better, safer, cruising experience, because they had no engine, or a poor one.

Crossing big oceans is the easiest possible application for boats with no engine, or inadequate smaller engines. If, however, one plans on a multi decade, "diversified", full time liveaboard, cruising experience... including hundreds of passes through reefs, (even DEAD to windward), lots of island hopping, tight quarters maneuvers, and winding river inland boat trips, as well as take a lot of the misery out of cruising, then having a good inboard installation is an accouterment to the experience, not a crutch.

Like I said earlier, our little $3,500 Yanmar has never failed us, in 18 years. We have never even had third world fuel problems, due to our extensive filtering system. (Polishing it when needed, as well as using a Baja funnel going into the tanks, followed by a Racor 500 going back out)

Those with no engine, or a lesser engine installation "in its overall utility", (like OB motors on larger Searunners), ALSO go to many of these nice places, and can do "some" of these things, but not nearly AS many. They simply can not, not with ANY amount of sailing experience! Physics will not allow it! They usually have a safe trip too, often with their sailing skills as an ace up their sleeve. We have those skills too, and no less of it...

Both ways work, and it is a personal choice, but comparing "their way" up against a bad, unreliable diesel engine installation, would be like our comparing "our way" to a Searunner skipper that doesn't know how to sail. It is a moot point.

With exact like vessels, both helmed by highly skilled lifelong sailors, the one with a proper inboard diesel engine, will have have far more "options" in what they can do, and where they can go. They are far far more utilitarian.

For the other "purist group" to stay out of trouble, (which they certainly can do also), they have to pick and choose among the countries, places, and inlets they can go to. They also have to choose appropriate current states, wind angles, time of day, etc. THEY are more limited in what they can do, not us. THEY have fewer options...

If, God forbid, our engine craps out someday, (which, as I said, hasn't happened yet), we will just revert to the same sailing skills of the other group, because we have them too.

Our boat, btw, really sails!, and other than putzing up rivers, "when we're at sea and actually cruising", we sail 99.9% of the time, even if it is at 3 knots, with the asymmetrical spinnaker, on a reach, we sail.

Other than the expense and effort of installing and maintaining it, our auxiliary propulsion has all the advantages listed and more, with no downsides. We also are less likely to drag down on the guy behind us, because we set our hook better, (we set ours @ full reverse RPM), because we can. At least on my old SC 28, full reverse throttle just lifted the sled out of the water, and even with the motor's bracket locked, the prop danced on the surface.

Our system is very low maintenance, btw... (I simply change the oil & tighten belts once a year), but it did take a LOT of care getting it that way originally. Still, when asked: "Which concept has the most OPTIONS across the board, under the broadest set of circumstances", as I said... it truly is a no-brainer.

Mark

[Roy M]

I would also like to see some pictures of the boat. It sounds like the builder was pretty innovative. It would be interesting to see how it went. It doesn't sound like it was "traditional" or was constrained by Jim's designs. I, too, made a relatively minor change when building the sterncastle on my 40. I didn't like the flimsy structural support of the wind deck around the sterncastle, having seen and walked on Jeff Allen's DINK'S SONG (and other 40's in the region) while I was building. Because I was working in steel construction (ironworker) I understood the concept of cantilever decks. I extended my sterncastle wing deck outboard about a foot more, then built the sterncastle cabinside like a t-beam about 6 inches from the hull side. Then, I laid up two layers of 1/4" ply for the cabin top, using graphite tow athwartships in bands, as if they were bands of steel, between the 1/4" plys. Before fastening the sterncastle roof down to the cabinsides, I used a hydraulic jack to support the crown I desired. This is a technique called "pre-stressing". When the epoxy kicked off, I removed the hydraulic jack and jumped on the cabintop. It was like a steel dome. And the side deck didn't bend, whatsoever. The loads are transmitted from the deck to the cabinside and across the prestressed cabintop to the other side . Rock solid! In Jim's design, because the 40 is so much narrower than the 37 at the stern, the crown was too high and the space inside the sterncastle too narrow for the back of my head when seated in the sterncastle dinette. The new shape was much closer to that lovely shape of the 37, and made for a beautiful dinette area. I also used the expanded aft wall of the sterncastle to install some additional fixed ports that get stained glass. The opening port of the sterncastle is still secure and commodious. Here are a couple pics. I don't have the new stained glass installed yet. I'm still working with an artist in Ensenada on them: two ovals, port and starboard, and a long crescent above the opening port. For contrast, here's a couple of shots of TRINITY, a 40 that was in San Diego several years ago:

[Mark Johnson]

Sounds and looks brilliant Roy! Very aesthetically done. (I see which one is Wilderness). It is so hard to make such changes to a Searunner, without uglying up the boat.

By all means... Do post photos and explanations of your innovations as you have them all "sussed out", as Jeff Allen would say.
We can all learn from your consistently beautiful work. (You "think a lot", don't you)?

Valid point about having enough headroom in the sterncastle. One change that they came up with on the later designed 34s, is that the sterncastle cabin sides slope OUT rather than in. In width at least, I think that we have more head and shoulder room back there, than in the 37.

It was a big improvement.

Mark

PS, DAMN, the 40 is a big boat!

[Mark Johnson]

This is a SR 40 we spotted a few years ago in in St John. They were obviously trying to fix the same headroom/space issue with large quarter circle blister extensions added onto the sterncastle. It did make the area more than 2' wider on each side, and didn't really hurt the boat that much, but the aesthetics really took a hit, imo.

ROY:
Your sterncastle mod solved the space issue, AND actually "added" to the aesthetics of the boat. I want to see it with that stained glass installed... Good job!

On the other hand... This next photo was a SR34 anchored near us in St Lucia. We had passed them several times, when doing day hops in transit from island to island. I'm sure she had WAY more dry space... but The HUGE hard cockpit "cabin" that they had recently built, had so much windage, she could hardly sail to windward at all.

This is why I say that, in modifying Searunners' cabins, OR in fabricating hard or soft tops & dodgers, aesthetically speaking, some folks get it right, and others, well... don't.

ROSS, Your cockpit enclosure, for example, came out fine to my eye.
Getting it right just takes a lot of thinking, visualizing, sketching, and in my case, even making life size models of the change.

Mark

[rossad]

Excellent posting Mark with lots of experience to back yourself.
People just dont get it sometimes.....
The end of it all is that these Searunners they are boats of brilliance. Genius design.
I shall be back on mine tonight... and not going back to the bach on our beautiful Waiheke island as the boat gives the family a better experience and a lovely sunset.

[sea dragon]

Originally Posted by rossad

. But it can be unlucky if you diverge to much from the designers original concept. You need to know more than them and that i am afraid is very unlikely.

Ok guys....
If you are looking for the designers original concept.
You need look nowhere else but at scrimshaw,the designers personal boat,and the first (and best,in my opinion)sea runner.
What propulsion system does Jim Brown have on his beautiful boat??????
Oh I remember............An Outboard on a Sled
The inboard diesel was and is just an option.
One that Jim Brown choose to forego...
In favor of the outboard/sled.
Mark,there are alot of right ways to walk the earth,and sail the sea.
More than one way can be" right"
I've never had a diesel,and I never will.It's OK
You have a great boat.I really like it,including the diesel engine,and your amazing attention to detail.
I am totally understanding that the inboard diesel is a good idea in alot of cases
But you really can't say what's right for me.
Because you aren't me

[md7a]

Has anyone tried something like this electric pod motor on a Searunner?

http://www.mastervolt.com/marine/pro...-professional/

I wonder about drag and growth, but at least in principle one could install the motor anywhere, avoid glands and shafts, and use any sort of generator available, from Honda to Whispergen.

[Cavalier MK2]

Those elitist, purest guys sound like they use really good seamanship! And don't need to overload their boats.

1 inboard dry weight 300 pounds no shaft, tanks etc...., compared to 1 yamaha 9.9 and 30 gallons of gas = 300 pounds ready to go. Mind you we don't actually bring that much gas......(sail boat) now if we add the missing items like shaft, exhaust and tanks to the inboard it is going to be more than another 100 pounds, add 200 pounds/30 gallons of fuel and we have 600 pounds ready to go, a option that is not best for every sailor. Less payload = less supplies = more frequent stops = more time motoring into harbors=more fuel used = etc.............

[rossad]

Just to add a little more salt to the subject. Back in the day when searunners where coming out over rooftops outer backyards the smelly noisey heavy large diesel engines where just that and attaching an ouboard made some sense especially to anything up to 31 feet. But in 2013 the diesel motors are somewhat different and so are the latest 4stroke outboards. Meaning the the latest designs are more beneficial with particularly the yanmar. In every whichway diesels are superior. except it is more expensive and thats why us trimaraners keep pushing the designs trying to improve one better. But I shall say it again.... An outboard just cannot match a diesel motor on my 37 foot searunner.
And one last thing, a diesel lasts10 times longer, heats the hot water, keeps the freezer and every other modern thing you ever want on boat going when the wind stops and the sun doesnt shine. But ok it costs more.

[pwratch]

This family cruised a 34' Seawind cat 'round the world over a 12-year span with outboard propulsion. His podcast covers his considered and experienced reasoning. The link is:

www.seawindcats.com/index.pl%3Fpage%3D58

Different boat, obviously, and I don't know the details of the installation but it's another experienced voice to consider.

[Boatguy30]

That link does not work, but I think may be Mark's mates on Magic Carpet which is not a Seawind, but a similar boat. I know Seawind had an audio interview of them on there site.

They had a single engine and the Seawinds have 2. I'm still weighing my options of one engine vs. two, but the production cats PDQ, Seawind, Maine Cat pretty much have the standard set as 2 motors for over 30' cats.

[pwratch]

Sorry about the link (copied from Google Search). Here is the page address:

www.seawindcats.com/index.pl%3Fpage%3D584

The boat is indeed "Magic Carpet".

[pwratch]

Damn, still doesn't work! The podcast is on the Seawind Catamaran site (seawindcats.com). Scroll down and there is an icon titled, cleverly enough, "Catamaran Cruising Podcast Interviews".

[Cavalier MK2]

Both approaches have merit and tradeoffs. Selection should be based on individual needs/wants, boat design and sailing styles. Saying either is better than the other displays a remarkable lack of understanding differences in people and the fact that other approaches can be equally valid.The Pardey's would be laughing themselves silly over this one. No engine? They must be even more inexperienced cruisers.
A diesel can help with the comforts of home appliances, which also add weight and expense, but that may be the way to lure your partner onto the water. For me Newick's comment about "modern inconveniences" is closer to the mark but in no way is it for everybody. On a monohull nobody really argues this issue-and they can carry a cast iron stove too for that homestyle warmth. One day technoogy may bring us electric power that is light and efficient.But we'll still be choosing between retractable and fixed drives!