Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:59:14 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:

Budget max to buy is low $100k's. Annual budget would be in the
neighborhood of $25-30k.

I think you are going to have difficulty finding a suitable powerboat
for extended/offshore cruising in that price range. There are many
very capable used sailboats for that kind of money but extended range
and offshore seaworthiness come at a steep price in trawlers.

Does Caribbean imply "extended range" or "offshore seaworthiness"?

Wayne.B wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:59:14 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:


Budget max to buy is low $100k's. Annual budget would be in the
neighborhood of $25-30k.


I think you are going to have difficulty finding a suitable powerboat
for extended/offshore cruising in that price range. There are many
very capable used sailboats for that kind of money but extended range
and offshore seaworthiness come at a steep price in trawlers.

There seems to be a LOT of listings in the Yachtworld.com site. The
bigger boats have more hours on the engines (in need of maintenance?).
(Not that many of these would be the right boat, just a cross-section of
prices and availability.)

I'd say have a look at trawler or tug configurations, but my new ideal
of live aboard / tour boats are the current generation of powered
cats.

Yep, there are some nice ones. Most of them are overpowered
though (true of power boats in general of course) and half
of them are uglier than a mule's butt.


You really need to get more specific than just 'live aboard'.
Will you be touring AK in winter or the islands in August or both?
What is your budget to buy and yearly?


Good things to know ahead of time. Then decide what you want
in terms of range, & draft.

Cal Vanize wrote:
AK, yes. But not in the wnter and not any farther than Prince Willian
Sound or Seward. The Carrib in the winter months, but not in August (I
have a mild alergy to hurricanes).

We're not planing to go from SoCal to Hawaii.

Budget max to buy is low $100k's. Annual budget would be in the
neighborhood of $25-30k.


Plenty of boats in that range, your problem will be to sort
out the "probables" from the "possibles" and allocate time
to do the leg-work.


From early research, trawlers seem to have a lot of what we're looking
for. Comfort, reliability, economic operation... These are more
important than speed.


We've been cruising in a trawler (after many many years
sailing) and find that it is a great way to travel. We don't
plan on living aboard though, other than on longer cruises
(keeping a shore residence).




Just started lookng at Border's this weekend. Trying to figure out which
mags "map" to our research needs.


None. That magazines cater to their advertisers. However if
you browse the current magazines as well as the library, as
well as checking into the trawers/trawlering discussion
group, you can find a lot of discussion of relevant issues.

We wanted a boat small enough to explore small coves &
creeks, shallow draft, medium/long range, good comfort for a
couple (by our definition), and NO FLYING BRIDGE. Took about
3 months of looking pretty hard, but we spent less than
you're budgeting... so obviously it can be done.

Fair Skies- Doug King

DSK wrote:


We wanted a boat small enough to explore small coves & creeks, shallow
draft, medium/long range, good comfort for a couple (by our definition),
and NO FLYING BRIDGE. Took about 3 months of looking pretty hard, but we
spent less than you're budgeting... so obviously it can be done.

Fair Skies- Doug King


May I ask why NO FLYING BRIDGE?

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:11:06 -0500, Jeff wrote:

Does Caribbean imply "extended range" or "offshore seaworthiness"?

It does to me. You've got to get there, and there are some rough
patches along the way with a long way between filling stations.

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 22:18:27 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:

May I ask why NO FLYING BRIDGE?

Good question. We love our flybridge and almost never use the lower
helm except in miserable weather.

Cal Vanize wrote:
May I ask why NO FLYING BRIDGE?


A couple of reasons, the main one is also a big reason why
we did not get a sailboat for serious cruising: sun exposure
& skin cancer.

The flying bridge also increases clearance height, and many
of the inland routes we like to explore have low bridges.
Poor access to the working areas of the deck when anything
is happening. It's an uncomfortable place to ride in rolly
conditions. Another reason is that I don't like their looks,
most of 'em anyway.

Instead we chose a boat with very good visibility from the
pilothouse, and very good access in & out.

It limits the search, since apparently 99% of powerboats
have flying bridges, but then we don't worry about following
the horde. We don't watch TV either

Fair Skies
Doug King

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 09:17:44 -0500, DSK wrote:

A couple of reasons, the main one is also a big reason why
we did not get a sailboat for serious cruising: sun exposure
& skin cancer.

Yes, that's a big issue for serious cruisers, especially on sailboats.
We have a full enclosure on our flybridge which helps a lot, but still
need to wear a hat during mid day.

Bridge clearance depends on where you boat of course but not a problem
for us except in the Keys.

The visibility and sense of openness on the flybridge is what makes it
important to me. I'd never give it up unless I was in a hostile
climate.

A couple of reasons, the main one is also a big reason why
we did not get a sailboat for serious cruising: sun exposure
& skin cancer.


Wayne.B wrote:
Yes, that's a big issue for serious cruisers, especially on sailboats.
We have a full enclosure on our flybridge which helps a lot, but still
need to wear a hat during mid day.


"Wear a hat" doesn't really work once you start developing
keratoses & basal cells. I've had sailing friends younger
than I am die of melamoma. It may get me too, but if so, I
want as many years as I can get beforehand!

If you've spent significant amounts of time out in the sun
over the past 30 years, the only answer is to keep out of it
as much as possible.




Bridge clearance depends on where you boat of course but not a problem
for us except in the Keys.


If you do the Great Loop, the limit is 17'. The western NY
canal adn the Lake Champlain canal is 15'. A lot of inland
routes have lower limits than that. We can get down to 12'
which would be impossible with a flying bridge, and opens up
a vast number of rivers & canals. It also cuts down the
number of bridges we have to wait for on the ICW.



The visibility and sense of openness on the flybridge is what makes it
important to me.

We have great visibility from our helm. Most boats with
pilothouses assume that you'll be driving from there, and so
the sight lines from the lower helm suck.



... I'd never give it up unless I was in a hostile
climate.


You *are* in hostile climate. It just takes a long time to
get you. Of course, if there was some way of bringing back
the ozone layer, that would help

DSK

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 10:02:47 -0500, DSK wrote:

A couple of reasons, the main one is also a big reason why
we did not get a sailboat for serious cruising: sun exposure
& skin cancer.


Wayne.B wrote:
Yes, that's a big issue for serious cruisers, especially on sailboats.
We have a full enclosure on our flybridge which helps a lot, but still
need to wear a hat during mid day.


"Wear a hat" doesn't really work once you start developing
keratoses & basal cells. I've had sailing friends younger
than I am die of melamoma. It may get me too, but if so, I
want as many years as I can get beforehand!

If you've spent significant amounts of time out in the sun
over the past 30 years, the only answer is to keep out of it
as much as possible.

I certainly qualify in the 30+ years department but I refuse to become
a total indoor recluse. I just enjoy being "out there" too much. At
age 61+ I've also gained the dubious distinction of being unable to
die young. :-)

I do take reasonable precautions with big hats and grade 50 sunscreen
however.


Bridge clearance depends on where you boat of course but not a problem
for us except in the Keys.


If you do the Great Loop, the limit is 17'. The western NY
canal adn the Lake Champlain canal is 15'. A lot of inland
routes have lower limits than that. We can get down to 12'
which would be impossible with a flying bridge, and opens up
a vast number of rivers & canals. It also cuts down the
number of bridges we have to wait for on the ICW.

We did the Champlain Canal in our old Bertram 33 flybridge sportfish
and found the clearance to be a tad over 15 ft at the Ft Edwards
bridge, which is the lowest one. We measured ourselves the day before
at 14 ft 9 inches and estimated that there was an additional 6 to 9
inches of clearance going under. There were quite a few 40 something
flybridge trawlers along the way, running with their masts down of
course. Unfortunately our GB49 is set up with a semi-permanent radar
arch on the flybridge, otherwise we could get down to 15 by dropping
the enclosure and mast.




The visibility and sense of openness on the flybridge is what makes it
important to me.

We have great visibility from our helm. Most boats with
pilothouses assume that you'll be driving from there, and so
the sight lines from the lower helm suck.



... I'd never give it up unless I was in a hostile
climate.


You *are* in hostile climate. It just takes a long time to
get you. Of course, if there was some way of bringing back
the ozone layer, that would help

DSK