Motorsailers? Trawlers?

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by Nord Sal

Besides Nauticat, Fischers and Finnsailers come to mind as motorsailers. I believe Willard made one too.

My little boat, 32'LOA, is similar. Trålaren literally translates as "Trawler."

Willard made a handful of motorsailors starting with a Willard 36 in the 1960s (I think 2-3 of the 39 hulls launched with motorsailor configuration), a single W40 Motorsailor; and about 10% of the 150 or so W30's built were motorsailor configuration. All were lousy sailboats, and not really trawlers either - sort of bastard children of the trawler world.

What is gaining some mild traction are trawlers with more significant sail plans. This offers auxiliary "get somewhere" propulsion and stability. Here's an example of a George Beuhler-design built in steel in China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhB7DvCS_i8

Peter

[hpeer]

There are various sail boat calculations like Sail area to displacement and Displacement:waterline. I have seen these numbers used to describe or define a “motor sailer” basically as a boat that has a lot of displacement for its length and/or sail area. Our boat fits this category. Yet we sail her.

The heavy displacement helps keep motion down, and my wife is prone to sea sickness. So since we are retired and spend 6 or more months a year on the boat we want something that is comfortable at anchor. We have been spending a lot of time in the Caribbean and there can be a lot of surge as the swell diffracts around the islands. This time last year we saw breakers in the mooring field at St Martin, but that was extreme. The constant motion wears folks out, detracts from the joy, and is more prevalent in lighter boats. Our heavy tub is relatively stable in such situations and I find my Wife tolerating things while others, less sensitive to the motion, get worn out. Happy Wife happy life.

IMHO displacement is a better gage of a boats size than simple LOA or LOD. It describes how big a hole you poke in the water. A heavy boat will have deeper bilges and more storage than a similar length lighter boat. Just makes sense.

All this is to say when looking at boats look at the basic numbers to get a feel for the boats characteristics. They may be more revealing than the description some broker tags the boat with.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Pizzazz

In my classification, you have:

#Sailboats, 40-50 ft would be a good size for a retiring couple. The major draw is sailing to the wind and easy to find slips. Yes, they do roll at unprotected anchorages but most of the time you will either find a good anchorage or dock at a marina. The sailboat will cross an ocean no problem.

# Cats, 40-50 ft again, much more space, more expensive, great for cruising but difficult to find inexpensive slips. If you want to cross European rivers you can take down the mast and go all the way to the Black Sea.

# Motor yachts or sports cruisers, 50-60 ft is the most popular range, luxurious, approx. double the price of the cat and 3x the price of a mono. Will not cross an ocean without some heavy modifications (not recommended). You have to deal with engine noise but you can go quite fast over short distances. Ideal for the Med.

# Trawlers, such as the Nordhavns. These are really specialized boats, designed to cross oceans, large propellers, slow diesels, very solid. Fantastic boats but unless you plan to cross oceans often you will find out you are better servers either by a cat or a cruiser.

I would recommend you consider the first three options. In terms of fuel consumption, a sailboat does around 10 nmpg, a cat slightly less and the power boats range from 0.5 to 2 nmpg. You can easily user a sailboat as a motor cruiser by adding 200 gallons of fuel in flexible tanks that you would only fill up to the max when you anticipate a major crossing. It will be a lot cheaper than a motor boat.

I don't necessarily object to the classifications but the size ranges are in no way remotely comparable.
- Both the Cats and the Motor yachts in the sizes you mention are drastically larger boats compared to the sail boats...If anything for comparable living space, I would flip it around 40-50 Cat or Motor Yacht vs 50-60 sailboat for something closer to comparable sizes (specific models will vary but in general terms).. Also that extra length cancels out a lot of the catamaran slip costs.

Not sure why you called out big cats for river cruising. Smaller cats (30-35ft) sure but big cats have beams that can cause problems fitting into locks.

Also, Nordhavns are really out there in their own world as far as boats. Great if cost is no object but lots of much more reasonably priced trawlers...but most lose the ocean going capability.

Fuel consumption is to a large degree a function of speed. Drop back to 70% of hull speed and they all will do much better. Also, while possible if you keep the speed way down, 10nmpg on a 45ft monohull would be doing very good. I would expect something down in the 5-7nmpg range as a better estimate for planning.

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Also, Nordhavns are really out there in their own world as far as boats. Great if cost is no object but lots of much more reasonably priced trawlers...but most lose the ocean going capability.

I spent 5-years as a full-time delivery skipper. About 40% of my business was delivering new Nordhavns. Needless to say, I have a lot of miles on the boats. Valhalla has it about right - you pay a lot to mitigate risk, which is a good idea if you're crossing an ocean.

About a year ago there was a Albin 40 Trawler that offered for sale on this site. Single engine boat who's owners had started in Southern California 2-years before and meandered their way through the Panama Canal and up to Florida. The boat was being offered for $50k or trade for an RV. There's a lot of cruising to be done between Alaska and Maine without crossing an ocean, but if the South Pacific beckons, a trawler is probably not as strong an option as a sailboat.

That said, a sistership to my Willard 36 (a Pilothouse version with a relatively decent sail plan) went from SoCal to Hawaii in 1987, and returned a couple years later. She burned 335 gallons to cover the 2400 nms, and averaged a tad under 6-knots for the 18-day trip. In today's dollars, around $1000 in fuel - pretty cheap overall, but she's an efficient hull that gets around 6-7 nmpg. This boat sold a few years ago - below is the broker's video showing the boat and a walk-through.

I like motorsailor, or more accurately, a trawler with a sail plan for stabilization and auxiliary propulsion. My favorite attire is bare-feet, shorts, and a tee-shirt. Next to that, fuzzy slippers. More conducive to a protected helm than an open cockpit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KNpJrXtKUs

[skyhawk]

thanks... some interesting food for thought here.

That fisher 46 is an interesting looking boat for sure. windows = more open living, a little bit like some of the cat sailboats I've seen vs the monohull basement living....but it's a monohull.

Ifitsworthdoing, I look forward to seeing how you build goes...Hopefully I'll see more about it here as you go along. I've recently been going more electric at home, with a BEV car, electric lawn equipment. Not by any stretch because I think it's more "green", but because I appreciate the quiet simplicity of use...no more yanking the rope to start a stubborn engine, just push the button...no more going to get gasoline.... no more stink. Electric is nice for many things.
Seems that it could be great for a sailing boat since you could regen under sail...or perhaps an electric wing engine (or electric main with diesel wing) but depending solely on solar seems like it might be a bit more chancy in a MV. But I suppose just like with my car, it depends on your needed range I suppose.

and Shrew, yea...in some ways I'm not really sure how to ask what I'm wondering either. Mostly I suppose I was listing some of the thoughts I've had comparing and contracting the different types. I guess ideally it would be interesting to here experiences and thought from folks that have a lot of experience in multiple types... really just why choose one form over the other....MV vs SV.... with the hybrid thing caught in the middle....

I suppose I'm a bit more interested in the sail component than ifitsworthdoing. Sitting here daydreaming about it anyway, I don't really care about getting the most optimal sailing performance since it seems that either way we're talking slow travel. It just seems smart to me to have an option to shut down the engine and move along more quietly when not in any particular hurry..... for me this would be much but not all of the time I'm travelling!

I could be all wrong about it, but it just seems to me
comfort at anchor or when moored is paramount since that's where most time would likely be spent.

next is the ability to relocate to the next port, not usually all that great of a distance say a day or three away... included here would be things like ability to clear under more bridges (think ICW) when not wanting to go offshore for whatever reason, make some sort of way against currents going up rivers and such, seaworthiness and ability to travel offshore (coastal)

lastly would be ability to make large ocean crossings. Just don't imagine most cruisers do that at any sort of very high frequency...

[skyhawk]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

A old 45ft monohull with a 10hp motor, would really struggle in a lot of conditions. Even in good conditions, it might struggle to get over 4kts. With a strong head wind or other adverse conditions, it might not be able to make any headway or even be pushed backwards.

Modern 45ft monohulls will have something in 40-75hp range and can happily run at hull speed in most conditions and even against a strong headwind will generally still be able to make decent headway.

but a similar sized trawler might have what? 140 HP?
still running at hull speed, right?
I understadn heavier, less efficient, etc....
So that's some of it...but still, I'm assuming the point of that extra power is so that they can make some sort of respectable headway into an 5kt current when needed, no?

[hpeer]

lastly would be ability to make large ocean crossings.

This year we came back from Dominica straight to Beaufort, NC. 1,400 nm in 13 days. A pretty lazy sail, not a lot of wind, had to motor for a couple of days and behind Guadeloupe. I e hive to one night to let a nasty squall line pass ahead of us. Wife survived with no complaints. I have previously done 7 days single handed.

So a heavy displacement “motor sailer” can get around with the wind alright.

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by skyhawk

but a similar sized trawler might have what? 140 HP?
still running at hull speed, right?
I understadn heavier, less efficient, etc....
So that's some of it...but still, I'm assuming the point of that extra power is so that they can make some sort of respectable headway into an 5kt current when needed, no?

Actually, Trawlers and similar sized sailboats often have same engines. My 30,000 lb Willard carries over 6000 lbs ballast (unusually high percentage for a trawler) and is powered by a 75 hp Perkins 4.236, the same engine as was in a friend's Irwin 52 sailboat. But you are mostly correct - a 6 cylinder Ford Lehman 120 hp is extremely common for older trawlers. Usually pushing a 42 footer at 7.5 kts burning about 2 gph.

Sailboats often compromise prop efficiency for lower drag under sail. So similarly sized boats with similar engines will usually mean the trawler has an efficiency edge under power.

But it really isn't the point. You have to decide on the type of cruising you want to do, and the lifestyle you want. Although a powerboat, our trawler is equipped similar to classic cruising sailboats from the 1970s (with modern electronics). That's rare in the powerboat world, though common for Willard owners. The long term costs to operate a sailboat vs a powerboat are roughly the same for most people, though if you're on an ultra low budget, you can get lower and go further with a sailboat than a trawler.

Peter

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by skyhawk

but a similar sized trawler might have what? 140 HP?
still running at hull speed, right?
I understadn heavier, less efficient, etc....
So that's some of it...but still, I'm assuming the point of that extra power is so that they can make some sort of respectable headway into an 5kt current when needed, no?

Actually, for a displacement monohull, weight has negligible impact on efficiency in modest conditions. In fact bashing into waves, it's an advantage as you lose less speed every time you hit a wave, so if the boat has lots of weight, waves don't slow it down as much and the motor isn't constantly trying to accelerate the boat.

For similar displacement and same water line length, 140hp, might buy you a fraction of a knot speed but at 3 times the fuel consumption.

Example: We had a 34ft Gemini Catamaran. It came with a 40hp outboard when we bought it. Top speed...7.8kt in calm conditions. We replaced it with a 25hp outboard...top speed 7.5kt. The big difference was it was a modern quiet 4 stroke so for the same speed it jumped from 3mpg to 6mpg at 6kts. We did the the Great Loop so lots of time on rivers and canals with plentiful current. The extra HP offers negligible benefit 99% of the time. I can only think of 2 times in 10yrs of ownership when it would have provided a minor benefit but certainly nothing to worry about.

PS: Be careful when looking at boats marketed as "trawlers". Many are semi-planning hulls outfitted with a pair of big diesels. Many people just like the look but want to be able to pour on the ponies and make 15-20kts.

[Cheechako]

Some are more "Motor" and some are more "Sailor". So it's really design specific. I would call the Nordhaven the farthest edge of "Motor". But there are plenty of decent sailors out there with a bit of Motorsailor attitude.

All my sailboats have been motorsailors simply by how they are used! I just want to get from point A to point B. I wont do it at less than 3.5 knots or so.

It's difficult for me to see the advantage of most motorsailors other than inside steering/ comfort. (and that is nice!)
My 44 ft sailboat (avatar) was plenty fast and used 5/8 gallon an hour and would do 8-8.5 knots in flat water. (Perkins 4-108)
My 30 ft trawler burned about 1.25 gallons an hour or a bit less in less comfort. (Perkins 4-236) A 25 hp engine should have pushed it just as fast and burned much less.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

....
It's difficult for me to see the advantage of most motorsailors other than inside steering/ comfort. (and that is nice!)....

Fuel capacity hasn't been brought up. From my perspective this is sort of what separates a motorsailer from a sailboat (insofar as they've ~all got large engines nowadays), particularly the metric of range under power alone.

[skyhawk]

Originally Posted by mvweebles

Willard made a handful of motorsailors starting with a Willard 36 in the 1960s (I think 2-3 of the 39 hulls launched with motorsailor configuration), a single W40 Motorsailor; and about 10% of the 150 or so W30's built were motorsailor configuration. All were lousy sailboats, and not really trawlers either - sort of bastard children of the trawler world.

What is gaining some mild traction are trawlers with more significant sail plans. This offers auxiliary "get somewhere" propulsion and stability. Here's an example of a George Beuhler-design built in steel in China.

Peter

I like the look of the transom on some of those ducks.... and some of those two masted boats are interesting too! I suppose like he wrote on the web site.... it's not meant to be a sailboat...but still. Looks interesting. Thanks

[Sparx]

I can think of a couple of sailboats, monohull and catamaran, that are used primarily as motor vessels. The sails come out for perfect conditions. This is a perfectly acceptable way to get comfort and stability.

[David Ess]

If fact we often hear that it's the norm for sailboats....to be motoring. My suggestion of a kite sail on a trawler is totally different.

[David Ess]

DieselDucks...great motorsailers!