Trimaran - Especially Searunner - Owners

[Constant Camber]

My trimaran displaces loaded 10,000 pounds.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Constant Camber

Hypothetical question
I checked out that seawind catamaran which has a 14,000 lbs displacement and is being powered by twin Yamaha 9.9 High thrust outboards. Plans to switch from diesel and mounting each one one a pivoting sled with Engine motors Just behind the aft bulkhead. The question is how much would the outboards do to value of the value of the boat instead of an inboard?

The Seawind 1160 lite displaces a little over 14,000 lbs and comes with twin 20-25 hp outboards.
The Seawind 1000xl displaced 10,000 lbs and came with the twin 9.9’s.

[Constant Camber]

Originally Posted by smj

The Seawind 1160 lite displaces a little over 14,000 lbs and comes with twin 20-25 hp outboards.
The Seawind 1000xl displaced 10,000 lbs and came with the twin 9.9’s.

Ok. With the tri at 10500 lbs I image it will work for high thrust 9.9’s. What do you think about being able to sell it that way. I have one sled attached with a 40 hp made strong and has handled big seas ok. Want to get a modern 4 stroke pair.

[Constant Camber]

Controls in center cockpit.

[longjonsilver]

Originally Posted by Constant Camber

Hypothetical question
The question is how much would the outboards do to value of the value of the boat instead of an inboard?

in my opinion, the outboards would detract from the value of the boat

jon

[Buzzman]

Not necessarily. Twin 9.9s are a useful size for getting on and off the dock and minimal motoring long distances.
20HPs might be better all round, especially punching into a steep chop or bar crossings, but it depends. If the 9.9s are the high thrust Sail Drives, with the lower gearing and bigger props, they'll develop as much thrust as a 20HP but use less fuel. Also drive the boat slightly slower.
It really does depend, re-sale wise, on the buyer's preference.
It wouldn't put me off, for a whole bunch of reasons, not least of which is replacement cost and ability to remove from vessel to service.
And diesels are stinky. Ask any woman.

[catsketcher]

Long John is a real Searunner owner so his opinion has lots of weight. I am a Searunner lover and plan owner (31) who built a cat for himself.
My 38ft cat is about the same weight as a 37 (4000kg) and works well with a single 25 Yamaha. (I now have two engines but for most of the boat's life it had one - I only got two for the maneuverability and to remove the pod from the middle of the bridgedeck)
I have built 3 sets of pods, all rotating. The first one was small and thin. It worked well, it rotated high up into a big box in the back and never slapped. The someone stole the outboard and the pod. Need a new pod.
I got rid of the box and put a cockpit there. So the next pod could only lift a little - about 12 inches off the water. Great engine Yamaha 25 big foot, but the pod eventually got replaced. I had it for years but it was pretty big (for a pod) and it would sometimes slam. Once it filled up with water, when the drain hole plugged up. My wife couldn't lift it up and down, so it made her a bit more worried about the boat (she loves the boat)
Before we went to Tassie I decided I wanted to make a better rotating pod. So after much thought I bought another engine, and made two new rotating pods. The new engine is only a 9.9 Yamaha and contrary to what Yamaha say, these new 9.9s are a bit of a joke. There is a bit of a black market for old Yammies that were about 330cc (detuned 15s) as opposed to the uprated 8s (at about 212 cc). So the 9.9s are not as good at low power as the old ones (my friend has a few of each and loves the old ones)(He sold me a new 212 version - so I now have a 25 on one side and a 9.9 on the other)
I went plenty fast enough before with the big 25 but my cat was really well set up for twin pods so we now have a nice arrangement with twins, but the boat only really motors any distance under one motor. We only use the second for maneuvering.
I reckon I could get a nice outboard installation into a 37 but I like playing with ply/epoxy and have form with pods. For mine I would consider a Jim Brown esque pod hinged from the rear bulkhead. But it would take time to get right and in all honesty, if I was looking at a Searunner (and if my boat was ever lost I would do that in an instant) I think a simple diesel replacement would be less work. More money but lots less effort.
I would certainly not do twins from the wings. I have to remember that even though I don't mind muscling engines around, I like to sail with others and so the engines have to be fool proof. It took a bit of effort (and money in clutches) to get both pods rotating and set up so that anyone can drop, lift and start them. It takes a bit of effort and I think it takes less to drop a diesel under the cockpit.

[owly]

Originally Posted by Constant Camber

Hypothetical question
I checked out that seawind catamaran which has a 14,000 lbs displacement and is being powered by twin Yamaha 9.9 High thrust outboards. Plans to switch from diesel and mounting each one one a pivoting sled with Engine motors Just behind the aft bulkhead. The question is how much would the outboards do to value of the value of the boat instead of an inboard?

To me the outboards would increase the value............ There are far too many negatives to inboards such as having through hulls, and being difficult to access for service, having a prop shaft and gland to leak, dragging a prop all the time resulting in having one more thing to clean of fouling and replace zincs, having a support for the prop shaft with a bearing assembly to wear out, and the drag of the props in the water when sailing or alternatively grossly inefficient folding props that negate any diesel efficiency advantage over a gas engine. An outboard comes out of the water when not being used, can be easily lifted out for service, and is fairly easy to work on.



If you intend to mostly motor sail diesels makes sense.... If you plan on sailing and motoring only in port, they are a liability. The diesel outboard offers the best of both worlds, but they are heavy and expensive.


Personally I think direct seawater cooling is as idiotic as it is ubiquitous. I have a huge issue with below water line through hulls...... a constant maintenance issue, they often freeze up, connections and hoses fail, boats have been lost to them many times... If it were up to me, there would be no such thing. At least outboards do not remain filled with corrosive salt water or require through hulls.



I'm obviously in the minority.... Ironically I've worked on diesels most of my life and own a number of diesel machines including a large truck. I like them.

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by Constant Camber

Hypothetical question
I checked out that seawind catamaran which has a 14,000 lbs displacement and is being powered by twin Yamaha 9.9 High thrust outboards. Plans to switch from diesel and mounting each one one a pivoting sled with Engine motors Just behind the aft bulkhead. The question is how much would the outboards do to value of the value of the boat instead of an inboard?

I am still trying to understand which Seawind cat you are talking about. The 1160 comes in both a diesel and outboard version (20 hp Honda, or 25 hp Yamaha). The 1000 is no longer in production but came with Yamaha 9.9 hp. All had two motors.

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by Constant Camber

Ok. With the tri at 10500 lbs I image it will work for high thrust 9.9’s. What do you think about being able to sell it that way. I have one sled attached with a 40 hp made strong and has handled big seas ok. Want to get a modern 4 stroke pair.

I've seen Condor 30 trimaran set up with twin Tohatsu outboards. I think 10 hp. Owner very happy with it.

[Constant Camber]

Revised from earlier post about Seawind Catamaran. Seawind 1000 XL2 displaces 12,100 pounds, 35 1/2 feet long and has twin high thrust 9.9‘s. Other questions would you need steering cable connections with The ability to steer in tight circumstances by forwarding one outboard and reversing the other? How much displacement does Searunner 37 or 40 have?

[Roy M]

My forty foot Searunner has a base weight (displacement of seawater) of about 10,000 lbs., and a listed payload (cruising capacity) of about 3500 lbs. It is currently being overhauled after 43 years. In the meantime since launch and happy use, I have upgraded, reduced excess weight, and prepared for the next stage of cruising, using modern materials and technology. WILDERNESS is on track to play in the Pacific, from San Diego (World's Best Home Port) to Hawaii to the Pacific Northwest, then back to SD to reprovision, restore, and head on to the next adventures in French Polynesia, always returning home. Searunners hold up well, if well built, well maintained and well handled.

[longjonsilver]

Originally Posted by Roy M

My forty foot Searunner has a base weight (displacement of seawater) of about 10,000 lbs., and a listed payload (cruising capacity) of about 3500 lbs. It is currently being overhauled after 43 years. In the meantime since launch and happy use, I have upgraded, reduced excess weight, and prepared for the next stage of cruising, using modern materials and technology.

How much weight do you think you have lost?

[Roy M]

All in all, a net loss of only about a couple hundred pounds, but that is because I added stuff that weighed less later. For example, my original Volvo diesel 25 hp engine weighed about 500#, the Yanmar weighs about 300#. Interior cabinetwork was reduced by substituting lighter materials, extensive use of hole saws to create swiss cheese panels, as one can see in aircraft assemblies. The floorboards are slowly being replaced by aluminum stringers (also with swiss cheese holes) and lighter deck panels. Even the frames were built with "lightening (not lightning)" holes when I started building the hulls. Mine was the first West System forty footer in Southern California. This allowed me to use less fiberglass, and in some places, alternative light weight cloths. Taking weight out, though, was largely off set by weight added for other improvements, such as the custom refrigerator (and eventual freezer), and the RIB which is mounted on the port quarterdeck with roller mounts for fast launch and retrieval. I have had the good fortune to know some talented builders who taught me tricks, and to have access to extraordinary materials that are available as scrap in my part of the world. And ALWAYS trying to follow Jim Brown's mantra of watching your weight. And, the decision to build the forty instead of the 37, made all the difference. The added volume means greater load carrying capacity, larger rig and sails, and more space for the crew.

But, now, back to work! The last of the modifications to the cabin top, preparations for replacing the rig and sails, are demanding my attention. Hopefully, the projects will be complete in a few months, and we can get back to making this bird fly again. Pictures will be forthcoming, but things are still a bit chaotic as they all come together. As always, sequences are the key to organizing complex projects. Unexpected crap like pandemics, supply chain disruption, and crazy weather keep things entertaining.

[owly]

Originally Posted by Roy M

My forty foot Searunner has a base weight (displacement of seawater) of about 10,000 lbs., and a listed payload (cruising capacity) of about 3500 lbs. It is currently being overhauled after 43 years. In the meantime since launch and happy use, I have upgraded, reduced excess weight, and prepared for the next stage of cruising, using modern materials and technology. WILDERNESS is on track to play in the Pacific, from San Diego (World's Best Home Port) to Hawaii to the Pacific Northwest, then back to SD to reprovision, restore, and head on to the next adventures in French Polynesia, always returning home. Searunners hold up well, if well built, well maintained and well handled.

The SR40 is a huge boat from where I sit. Jim Brown did a good job of not bulking up his boats as they get larger, hence the good payload..... actually listed as 3800 lbs.



Catamarans are inherently better load carrying boats than trimarans with two load bearing hulls instead of one, however the tendency to put ever larger bridge deck cabins and more conveniences and make them floating condos seems to be almost irresistible as they get larger. They are inherently better in extreme conditions (cruising cats) because of the weight distribution and displacement distribution... reportedly.

I'm a long time admirer of Jim Brown. He's made a lot of good design choices, and dated though the Searunners are, they still are good voyaging boats, and there are few trimarans I would choose over a Searunner.



My current favorite plans built multihull is the Woods Vardo by Richard Woods. At 34' and about a 4000 lb payload and essentially the same weight as the SR40, if offers a bridge deck cabin with all around view........ which is extremely important to me. I want to be able to take shelter, and see around me with the cockpit just a few steps away without climbing a ladder. It's a boat I would feel very comfortable taking around the world solo.


My personal criteria are notably different from those of most designers. Most designers are either designing for performance or designing condo cats...... It's like politics in America today. There are two extremes and those of us who are rational moderates are abandoned. I don't need or want a racer...... performance is not high on my list of criteria........ nor do I need or want a condo. The middle ground is possible, but most people are seduced by one or the other extreme..... so designers cater to those extremes.


H.W.