How about...a Marinaut 25?

tpbrady":2kvzwcqh said:
Les,

I understand weight and efficiency are inversely related, but when I moved from a 22 to a 25, the thing I noticed the most was the stability of the 25 in seas compared to the 22. The mass of the 25 prevented 2-4 foot seas from pushing it around very much. Sometimes in my 22 I wish I had a seat belt. Will shaving 1500 lbs from the operating weight cause a significant change in cruising comfort as sea states increase?
Click to expand...

Hi Tom,

The honest answer is that the answer is "it's very situational". Every hull has its good points and its bad. It's really difficult to make a blanket statement about how Hull A is always going to be better than Hull B. It may be sometimes but not always (unless Hull B truly sucks).

We're getting great ride out of the Marinaut 215 even though it's very light. It just seems to work. If we can translate that ride to the Marinaut 25 then I think a lot of folks would be quite happy with it.

But really, where's the stopping point? To me the Rosborough RF-246 is a much more comfortable boat than the C-Dory 25. Why doesn't everyone buy the RF-246 instead since it weighs more than the CD25 and is more comfortable? Lots of reasons including the fact that it's more expensive and "Oh by the way" it's about 10,000 to 11,000 pounds on the trailer. Many might have a truck that will handle the CD25 but not the RF-246. Many might just not want to pull that much weight.

Personally I think the hull shape is going to keep the Marinaut 25 comfortable in conditions that don't work well for the CD25. While the CD25 gives a lot back to the owner in terms of space, accommodation, and livability it's water manners have never been sterling (though quite safe).

At the end of the day, I don't think the question can be reduced to a simple weight question. It's really about the whole package. If we can offer the Marinaut 25 as a lighter alternative that means some folks will be able to tow that boat that can't tow the CD25, and the fuel economy should be better. The ride shouldn't be any worse that the CD25 (I don't know how it could be) and I think there's a good chance it will be more comfortable. But never the less they're different boats and folks will have to choose what's best for them.

Les
 
Rob & Karen":3vep4xfc said:
Les,

I was surprised to see that you are not competing with Ranger Tug or CD25, with no shore power, refridgerator, water heater, or the like. I guess I misunderstood the intended mission of the boat. If it is really going to be a CD22 or M215 with a head compartment, then it seems like we are talking about a $20k-$30k head....which is not something I would be willing to pay for. When I think of a larger boat, I am also thinking of something that I will be more comfortable spending extended time on while cruising. I am looking for the comforts that you plan to omit. It sounds like I may not be your target customer.

Rob
Click to expand...

Hi Rob,

I really don't know what we're talking about money wise. Right now the Marinaut 215 is $46,400 and based on the last boat we built that will have to increase somewhat. Based on the price per pound that we're currently paying for the 215 hull I think we'll end up with about $6,000 to $7,000 more in the 25 hull.

The windows will be slightly more expensive, the fuel tanks will be slightly more expensive, the head compartment and head will cost something, the rails will be slightly more expensive, we'll need to use SeaStar steering rather than BayStar steering, etc. Not a lot will increase in price much but most will increase some.

I'd like to think that we can offer the Marinaut 25 for say $10,000 more than the Marinaut 215 and that would make it about $55,000. Just to be conservative I upped that to $60,000 when I started this conversation.

As far as total price, the engine will cost more and the trailer will cost more. So if you take the $60K I estimated and add a Honda BF150 ($15K) and a trailer ($6k) we're at $80K. In base price terms we should be quite far from a $20K to $30K head, more on the order of $10K to $15K and of course you're getting more than just a head for the difference.

If on the other hand we need to include shore power ($1200), a refrigerator ($1000), a water heater ($1000 with all the plumbing and fixtures), a battery charger ($300), and such then obviously the price difference will climb but might still be within the $15K difference range (and all those prices are just for the sake of having some examples and likely a bit high).

When we sold C-Dory boats most of the CD22s we did went out of here fully loaded at $60K to $65K, the CD25 went out around $90K so there always has been about a $25K to $30K difference in the CD22 versus the CD25 (when all said and done). I'm trying to keep the Marinaut 25 a bit closer to the 215 than that but time will tell.

The main thing is we're going to try and build the boat our customer wants. If they want a light simple boat at the lowest possible weight I want to make that available. If they want all the cruising goodies with lots of water and all the comforts then we're going to accommodate them too. Since we build each boat "to order" we'll be able to give folks what they want (within reason) for a dinette, or a helm seat, or a settee with a table, or whatever. They can have a portable toilet or built-in. They can have a shower or no shower. And, on and on.

I've probably overemphasized several of the characteristics of the boat and my vision for it. I think the real point I was trying to make is that it's not going to just be the Marinaut version of a C-Dory 25, it will have a different look and feel and maybe appeal to folks that want something a little bit bigger than the CD22 or M215 but not quite what the CD25 is.

Les
 
Why not just make a 26' boat. It should not have to be a deal breaker with the additional weight. It does not have to weigh as much as a Rossie. The boat could be sold stripped or loaded. One of the things about Ranger Tugs is they had almost all the options people would want available through the factory. With an extra foot you could carry more fuel maybe have a generator compartment that if it was not used it could be used as storage or for additional water. I'd grab the extra foot and work on being able to provide the boat in a couple standard configurations. Having the extra room for options like inverters, solar panels, extra batteries stuff cruisers need. Maybe instead of a larger dinette make a fold out table option for the cockpit. I mean Ranger has done alright selling the new 27' models and they sell for 200k. I'm thinking for the difference in price above the 215 you have the chance to build in things that will make people want folks to make the leap up to the 26' boat. A stripped fishing scow in that size has a pretty limited market. Why cut yourself short?
D.D.
 
Chester":2hztb8sl said:
I like the concept, stick to your guns.
Adrienne has been talking about a bigger boat but the added complexity, cost and maintainance of systems puts me off. I love our simple C-D 22 Cruiser. If a system isn't there it won't break down.
Dinettes piss me off by there very existence though they seem to be a necessary evil on this class of boats. I would rather have some scheme where you dine on the settee using some sort of folding table. I have no idea of how or if this is possible or even advisable. Oh yeah, a forward facing navigator seat is a must.
Is the M215-250 aisle wider than a C-D 22's? IMO it dosen't need to be.
Click to expand...

The passageway (aisle) on the Marinaut 25 is about the same as the the M215; you're right, it doesn't need to be wider.

Some sort of settee with a table would be easy to do. In fact it would be easy to have a settee along the port side with a nice copilot seat forward of that. Depending on how much aft port locker (closet) you felt you'd have to have the settee could be long enough to be a comfortable berth. Or a place to stretch out, melt into a corner, and read. Lots of things are possible without a lot of expensive custom work.

Les
 
Will-C":xpvstwfh said:
Why not just make a 26' boat. It should not have to be a deal breaker with the additional weight. It does not have to weigh as much as a Rossie. The boat could be sold stripped or loaded. One of the things about Ranger Tugs is they had almost all the options people would want available through the factory. With an extra foot you could carry more fuel maybe have a generator compartment that if it was not used it could be used as storage or for additional water. I'd grab the extra foot and work on being able to provide the boat in a couple standard configurations. Having the extra room for options like inverters, solar panels, extra batteries stuff cruisers need. Maybe instead of a larger dinette make a fold out table option for the cockpit. I mean Ranger has done alright selling the new 27' models and they sell for 200k. I'm thinking for the difference in price above the 215 you have the chance to build in things that will make people want folks to make the leap up to the 26' boat. A stripped fishing scow in that size has a pretty limited market. Why cut yourself short?
D.D.
Click to expand...

Why does the extra foot in length make a difference? I'm not following what's not in the 25' version that could be in a 26' version? I can already get 100 gallons of fuel (in the side tanks) in the 25, we can already get the head in there, we can already provide a 6' 6" berth. The challenge in the dinette is not because of restricted length but because of restricted width.

Every foot I make the boat longer means it gets heavier. I'm already pushing the limits to keep the boat towable by standard pickups, Jeep Grand Cherokees, older Toyota Tundras, and the like. I started out wanting to add 30" to accommodate a head compartment, which would have made the boat 24' long. I upped it to 25' to get the longer v-berth and add another 6" in the cockpit.

I'm still tempted to make this one shorter again and then plan on the 27 footer for the full-on cruiser. :)

Les
 
Here's a teaser. This is NOT the final design, in fact it's just the preliminary concept:

img0178.jpg



One of the main changes would be a lower cabin top and this one was drawn at 25' 5" rather than 25'.

Les
 
Yes!!

I guess the mention of 27 was a "freudian slip". It certainly makes your end objective very much clearer for me. 8) and I honestly hope that your sales / income projections for the current model will allow you to progress to the 24.999 and a 27 without diluting your potential for any model. Right now I imgine you have a significant investment to show some ROI on.

Having spent my life "adjusting" NPV calculations to convince investors and board members that we really needed to make product "x", NOW, I feel for ya!!

I very much like your concept of a baseline plus modular options and you certainly have a good range of background data to work from if you compare RF's with Ranger and CD's. It's easy to see where the top and bottom of the equation are but it's a PITA to figure out the sweet spot in the middle is (or rather, where it will be when you bring the product to market).

Dylan said it right... (Bob Dylan that is, Not Dylan Thomas)

Merv
 
I'm not sure many of the guys with the older pickup trucks have a 100k to drop on a new 25 1/2'er. They might buy it used when its ten years old. I'd quit half stepping and build the full blown 27. I would think you want to be shooting for the guys who can afford new pickup trucks. You know the ones that Ranger is selling to. Besides you don't want you new design sitting by the side of the road behind a broke down used up tow vehicle.Just my 2 cents. I have a 23 I would want to to move past a 25 if it was right and it was still trailerable. The Rangers are two tall for my taste. I would love to see a 27' that sits as low as a 22 or a 215 does in the water. You know like a cross in between a C-Dory and a Bertram Build it they will come.
D.D.
 
Rob & Karen":11n7wfmm said:
Les,

Tell us about the 27. Maybe that is the one I need to wait for.

Rob
Click to expand...

Oh goodness Rob, I was just being facetious! Just thinking about developing another boat is enough to give me heartburn! :mrgreen:

It's about $150,000 a pop to produce the plug and molds for a new model though a M27 might be a bit less expensive since the hull would just be a stretched M25. Still a new cabin/deck mold would have to be built so while there could be some savings it would still be expensive.

What would you want in a 27 that you wouldn't have in a 25? This is a serious question, I'm not being rhetorical. If (as a designer/builder) you don't increase the width of a boat then I'm left wondering what folks would want to see added due to the extra 2' in length in an M27.

Les
 
Will-C":2s803u87 said:
I'm not sure many of the guys with the older pickup trucks have a 100k to drop on a new 25 1/2'er. They might buy it used when its ten years old. I'd quit half stepping and build the full blown 27. I would think you want to be shooting for the guys who can afford new pickup trucks. You know the ones that Ranger is selling to. Besides you don't want you new design sitting by the side of the road behind a broke down used up tow vehicle.Just my 2 cents. I have a 23 I would want to to move past a 25 if it was right and it was still trailerable. The Rangers are two tall for my taste. I would love to see a 27' that sits as low as a 22 or a 215 does in the water. You know like a cross in between a C-Dory and a Bertram Build it they will come.
D.D.
Click to expand...

Ok, same question as I asked Rob then. Given that we're going to arbitrarily restrict the width to 8' 6" on the M25 or M27 what do you feel an M27 could offer you that a M25 couldn't?

My first inclination is that the difference wouldn't be in more specific things but rather a bit more of what's already there (little larger galley, little larger head, bit larger cockpit, etc). But, is that correct? That's why I'm asking. Maybe other spaces/features are desired and I'd like to know what they are.

So if I could bring a M27 to market for (WAG) $75K for the base boat with standard equipment (which would put a fully rigged boat in the $125K or so range) would that be an appropriate target?

Les
 
I'm conflicted. (Sheesh...sounds like a sitcom.)

I started down the path of a larger Marinaut thinking about just making the 215 about 30" longer to accommodate a head compartment, and that would have made the boat about 24' in length.

The next iteration was to give it a bit more length, split between the v-berth and cockpit, and to make it 6" wider. That's about where we are with the M25.

Now some seem encouraged by the thought of an M27.

I'm beginning to suspect that having just one more model isn't going to address all the needs/desires out there. But at this time I can't address two models at once so I've got to pick one model and go with it (for now).

What do you think folks are looking for in general? I'm not so naive that I think there's really a single answer but I wonder if there's a specific part of the market that's not being addressed and where some demand exists.

So the three choices, at least as I see them now, are:

1) A slightly larger 215 that would essentially be the same boat but would have a head compartment. Call it an M24 or M246.

2) A larger boat that would compete (at least space-wise) with the C-Dory 25, the Ranger Tug 25, and (to some degree) the RF-246. Call it an M25 or M256.

3) An even larger boat with full long range cruising capability and would still be towable (and 8' 6" wide). Call it an M27.

Keep in mind that the goal (for me) is to keep any model looking like a Marinaut; that is, with a low profile and pleasing proportions. Due to our construction method the goal is also to keep the boats light (for their size), keep the horsepower requirements low, keep the handling characteristics that the M215 has, and to build them to a high quality standard.


I'd love to hear what folks would choose (even if you're happy with and going to keep your current boat).

Thanks much,

Les
 
My vote is for a fully cruise ready M27 to do the Great Loop with.
Hopefully it will be lighter & more fuel efficient than the Rosborough 246 & the Ranger Tug 27 and have better
handling.
 
I wonder why Ranger built a 27' when they already had a 25'? And they seem to be selling. No wider than 8.5 so it's still trailerable. I'm thinking slightly bigger galley, a little more counter space hey how about an oven plus a slightly larger cockpit so you could entertain like six people? I'm sure there are a lot more reasons, spots for an inverter, diesel heater, not a wallas, diferent stove options maybe a propane locker.
D.D.
 
I agree on a cruise ready 27. Definately a larger head with a sink, remember the women will definately have ideas. For the PNW Wesbasto heater, larger water capacity, as in the Cutwaters they have propane cooktop and small propane tanks in the cockpit. Microwave/convection oven combo, hanging closet. Not sure if a walk through transom can be added with an outboard and kicker configuration.
 
There you go Les- you've opened Pandora's box!

I wonder what a 27 would have over a 25 if it didn't have a bigger beam. We sold quite a few Shamrock 270 Mackinaws and that was a very nice boat. Number one request- berths for four.

Which gets back to the double wide dinette. My gut instinct is that if you were going to go 27, you should go wider. lots of guys towing 9' to 9.5' boats down the road. If you're going to go 27, then go all the way with a full blown cruiser, and weight be damned.

Then the 25 becomes the "just right" for many of the buyers, with the 215 being "too small" and the 27 being "too big".

Of course that would mean a 27 that would be pushing the $160 to $170 mark, and it will need to be a very refined boat. bare fiberglass interior probably wouldn't cut it at that price point.

Which brings to mind the Venture 29. Which I thought was a neat little boat, and certainly a different direction for C-Dory when they tried it, but I think the boat with very few changes could have worked. I think it could have been a decent seller, just not to the existing C-Dory owner group. It would ahve required a whole new marketing plan to bring in new buyers.

I don't envy you this- there is no right or wrong answer here. Although the four person dinette seems to be a huge request. ;)

The next big question- is anyone ready to get a checkbook out and order one?
 
Les,

Loving this conversation. Having owned a 22' and a 27 footer, let me throw in my two bits.

1. I think having a 4 person dinette is a waste if it involves eliminating storage or passage room. On the Devlin and Campion, the table sits in the garage. We used tv or laptop trays. With guests, we go to the cockpit and use deck chairs.

2. I wouldn't go with a 27 footer and a 8.5 beam. Looks funky. Also, the handling could be whacked. I'd go with a 24 or 25 foot length and keep it trailerable. The CD 29' was a mess, in my opinion.

Consider Tollycraft. Their best seller was the 26 footer. It's gone and so is the Venture 26, which is my favorite CD. Replace them and you could find a real solid marketing niche. I wouldn't consider the Ranger boats serious competition. They are slow boats...not suitable for fishing or fast cruising.

What size would be the berth on a 25 footer-ish boat?

-Greg
 
If you were going to do a 27' Marinaut, I'd look for something that's quite a bit different and go with a layout and design that's similar to the (one-off?) 27' C-Dory that Aviq has. That's a completely different boat and I can't think of a competitor to it in the current marketplace. I and several others here have lusted after this boat. I don't quite know exactly why, I just think it's a cool cabin design that provides for a lot more room.

27_pilothouse.jpg
IMG_0405.sized.jpg
 
Some sort of settee with a table would be easy to do. In fact it would be easy to have a settee along the port side with a nice copilot seat forward of that. Depending on how much aft port locker (closet) you felt you'd have to have the settee could be long enough to be a comfortable berth. Or a place to stretch out, melt into a corner, and read. Lots of things are possible without a lot of expensive custom work.

Les[/quote]

Yep...the L-shaped settee you describe is on my Devlin and we loved that. It gave us lots of options. Double berth....lounging....dining for two...or a table for the laptop. For me, the forward facing Admiral seat is a must too. Nice to have two sets of eyes looking forward.

-Greg
 
Back
Top