Click for Northern Lights Click for Abeking Click for JetForums Click for Delta Click for Westport

Would love to hear pros and cons on 54' & 60' sport yachts

Discussion in 'Viking Yacht' started by Dennis Dotson, Nov 17, 2016.

You need to be registered and signed in to view this content.
  1. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    My wife and I loved to cruise. We did so up and down the east coast for 7 years before a combination of the recession and hurricanes got us out of boating. Always had the hazard of the schedule on board and we made do with a 49' Albin and then a 43' Tradewinds, but we loved every single day on the water. Now we have a chance to get back into boating.

    We want to go north (New England) in the summer and move back to Ga. or SC in the winters. Our budget is bigger these days, but our bones and sea legs a little less willing to be beaten up. Here are my questions.

    If I had my way, I'd be aiming at something like a Fleming or Offshore or Selene. My wife is wanting a little more condo appeal. It's her money. Fuel costs will hurt, but won't rule out these larger engines. We both love the 54' & 60' Viking Sport Yachts (1995 - 2000) for different reasons. I love the lines and the look of these boats and I suspect that with Viking's fish-boat tradition that these should be great boats when things get a little sloppy. My wife loves the condo appeal of their aft deck, the salon, as well as the lush state rooms. We both enjoy piloting from the fly-bridge and these vessels have all the comforts up there.

    There will be no schedule on board this time, but you can never tell when things will get a little snotty. How do these boats handle in 4-6 foot sloppy seas? Why are there so few with stabilizers on this model? Are stabilizers not as effective at the higher speed? I have never had a stabilized vessel, but have heard that speed improves their performance. I have seen many of the 61-65 foot Viking Motor Yachts with stabilizers, why not in the Sport Yacht?

    I would really appreciate the thoughts of anyone owning or having experience with the Sport Yacht models.
  2. Prospective

    Prospective Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    Messages:
    232
    Location:
    New England
    I am wondering if you're not talking about two different animals. To my knowledge, Viking Sport Yachts are now Princess, based in Europe and designed more to compete with the likes of Azimut. I don't believe they are, or were ever related to the Viking in NJ that builds sport fishing boats and also once built the Viking Motor Yacht, a large aft cabin style cruiser on the sport fish hull. The Viking Sport Yachts are planing hull boats and, as such, do not typically need stabilizers, at least not the fin style common to trawlers. Newer ones may well have gyrostabilizers which have become much more common in planing hull boats. But I would not assume that the ride of a Viking Sportfish would be at all similar to that of a Viking Sport Yacht as it's two entirely different companies.
  3. Cruz

    Cruz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    123
    Location:
    East Coast
    I believe the Viking Sport Yacht of that vintage the OP is referring is indeed the Viking line of aft-cabin MY's from that era. Princess Yachts had been re-badged as Viking Sport Cruisers for the US and are now imported/marketed under the Princess name. I'm sorry I can't speak to the performance of the model in question.

  4. Pascal

    Pascal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    8,546
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    I think the Sportyacht was based on a Viking hull and has nothing to do with the eurostyled Viking Princesses of the late 90s early 2000s

    I wonder if they were build by the Viking plant in NJ or if they were subcontracted to Lazzara in Tampa like the motoryachts were in the early 90s

    Personally I don't care much for the styling and layout. I prefer a true flush deck which gives you a lot more space. Hatters had a couple of models along the same lines, they called them sports deck

    Because of the lower center of gravity compared to a flush deck MY and the higher cruise they probably don't really need stabilizers
  5. olderboater

    olderboater Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    Messages:
    7,130
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    It would greatly help if he'd link to a specific boat of the type he's talking about as the terms Sport Yacht and Motor Yacht aren't really making it clear to us it seems. Outside the current line I don't see the term Sport Yacht used, just Sports Cruisers which was the Princess line. But then I think of the Princess as a Motor Yacht too.
  6. Pascal

    Pascal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    8,546
    Location:
    Miami, FL
  7. Capt Ralph

    Capt Ralph Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,443
    Location:
    Satsuma, FL
    If Dennis would only come back to help.

    BTW, a model similar to what Pascal points to, is in for hull repairs. Storm Mathew put a pile thru it's port forward hull starting just above the water line to the gunnel, a few back from the stem.
    From the looks of it, that is built well up forward. Sadly, it took hours but the pile won. I am impressed.
  8. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Sorry I didn't get back to review the responses earlier. Thanks to everyone for commenting. Yes, the model listed above by Pascal is the model that I was referring to. And the 54 is the same boat without the cockpit.

    It now makes a lot more sense why these planing model hulls do not benefit from stabilizers, although I had found one of the 60' Viking models with Naiad stabilizers.
  9. Trinimax

    Trinimax Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    245
    Location:
    Trinidad and Tobago Yacht club
    Comparing the 54 and the 60 MY, I would go with the 60 if I was you. You will find the cockpit very useful for ease of access to the water for swimming, easier line handling, adds another social area to the boat, allows the option of some light fishing, and lastly in my opinion, it is a little bit more pleasing to the eye.
    The 60 also carries 1300 gallons of fuel vs the 950 gallons found in the 54.

    good luck with your search
  10. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    I agree with you on all accounts about the 54 vs. the 60. I love the clean look of the vessel with the cockpit as well as your other points. There is one 54 available currently however that has much lower hours and is really exceptional on the boat porn site! lol

    http://www.**************/boats/199...9496/Vero-Beach/FL/United-States#.WDCG2FxXlQ-

    I am a few (maybe several) months away from making the jump, so many of these boats won't be available when I do move. Pascal prefers the flush deck and I can see his point. I am just very comfortable with the aft deck configuration because it is what I have been used to and we loved that large, very open, aft deck area in our Chinese Marine Trader. I know, the similarities between these vessels pretty well end there at the aft deck. Looking at the cabinetry, the systems, the stainless, the roominess, this looks to be a Tradewinds on steroids.

    I have a lot of investigating to do between now and when I pull the trigger. Living in the mid-west, with family concerns, I am in no good place to get real on-board experience. I have a couple friends in the industry who I will lean on when the time comes as well as taking time and investment in a team of surveyors.
  11. Pascal

    Pascal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    8,546
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    Most flush decks have nice aft decks too. What is so nice about flush decks is the lack of going up and down stairs all day. Flush decks with pilot houses like hats and Vikings MY are also a lot easier to handle because you are just a few steps from your lines. No need to comes down steps from the fly bridge.
  12. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Point well taken.
  13. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,534
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    A cockpit really makes a motoryacht. Makes it much easier to board when stern to, much easier to get lines, carry things, swim/dive/fish. I ran a 60' a long time ago, had a weird exterior layout I thought of all the various levels, but was fast. I think 26 knots cruise, and the one I ran had mans I believe......
  14. motoryachtlover

    motoryachtlover Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    smithfield, VA
    I have owned a 95 54 since 2007. It has been a very good boat so far. The head sea ride is a tad disappointing (prior boat 42 Bertram my) but the overall ride is very good. Following and quartering seas don't have you fighting the wheel too much. We have made 7 or so trips to the Bahamas and many runs offshore from North Carolina back to Florida many tines in the winter. You will love the enclosed flybridge in bad/cold weather. The boat has a lot of stairs because of the many levels and it is irritating but they are stairs not ladders. I agree that a cockpit would be nice but not essential. A 2050 rpm cruise will give you 22-23 knots with full fuel, water and a 13' tender on the bow. It has been my favorite boat so far mainly because it has taken us so many places and has been very reliable. They are not cheap to maintain and update but none of them are.
  15. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Thank so much for writing of your experiences motoryachtlover. That was exactly the type of information that I was looking for. I've probably got a dozen + questions for you.... Your experience is so valuable. I would appreciate any response.

    I have read where many owners of the larger boats with the larger engines cruise at a lower RPM (as long as the temperature is near the cruising temp) and then take the RPM up to 80% load every 5-6 hours or at the end of the day. Is this something you have used on your 54? Or is this theory false economy on the 54 hull because it pushes too much water when it does not get up on plane?

    I am an old fart. I probably will own the next boat 5-6 years (if all goes well) before it is time to sell. Fuel cost won't be the determining factor with me, but as I put together a kind of performa for owning a boat for 5-6 years, paying $30,000 per year to the oil companies (for 200 hours of annual operation) is money that you never get back. $30k X 6 years = $180k vs. $5000 on a Selene or OA, etc.

    On the Man's ... I am also reading the cost and importance of their 1000 and 2000 hour services. I have heard that some owners feel the need to have the 1000 hour service completed every 2 years despite the hours? What is your experience?

    Also, do you get a dramatic vibration at trolling speed and do you get a lot of smoke at idle speed?

    You have a great boat sir. Your testimony encourages me. Thank you again for sharing your experience.
  16. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,534
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    Running any yacht at hull speed and diesels at 800 or 1000 rpms will result in your best fuel economy. A set of 1050 mans probably burns 6 gph at 800rpms and 12 gph at 1000 rpms. (guessing). Your fuel usage will not be that low on a Selene or OA in comparison. Lower on the Selene but not anywhere near that low. The otherside of the coin is you're burning fuel to get somewhere and how much time do you have. Do you want to spend 2-3x as much time rolling around in the ocean transiting or run and get somewhere.

    MAN calls for the service to be done every 1000 hours or 2 years. MOST people don't, they do it either every 1000 hours or maybe every 6-10 years.

    You will get some smoke at trolling speed and a little vibration, it really depends on the boat when it comes to that with the older mans
  17. Pascal

    Pascal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    8,546
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    As J said there won't be much difference in fuel burn when running at hull speed. While a full displacement hull maybe a little more efficient and the smaller engines will burn a little less over all the difference is small. Most 55/60 planning hull MY burn around 9 to 11 goh at 9 to 9.5 kts. A trawler will burn around 7 to 8gph which really makes very little difference over all

    The faster boat gives you the option to run fast when needed. Personally I enjoy running at hull speed when seas are smooth. I find it more relaxing, less noise, less wear and tear. When things gets rougher though, especially rolling, it s nice to get the boat on plane for a better ride.

    Best of both world
  18. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Thank you guys. Great points about the time variable, Man service and the fuel usage at hull speed. Time was always my enemy when I cruised before. Trying to run a business and the neccesary travel back and forth from the mid-west to the coast were both getting in the way of my cruising. I will not let time enter the equation this time around. I love watching the world go by at 8-9 knots! That is all I have known.

    I am pretty ill informed, really ignorant, about the cruising experience on anything above about 35,000 lb. displacement. I'm sure it shows. It has to be great to get that extra stability on a boat displacing twice that and more. And how much better would stabilizers effect a day cruising off the coast?

    I greatly appreciate your input. I am also extremely curious about the real experience that motoryachtlover, has had on his 54' Viking. Does he actually run his boat at hull speed? And with all the cautions that I have read about Man vibrations at lower rpm's and their smoking and the expense of their repair, I'd just love to hear someone say, yeah I've got one of those and that is how I operate and it has worked for me.
  19. Dennis Dotson

    Dennis Dotson New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    I should not have used the OA as an example. The Selenes though, that I have been salivating over on yacht world are equipped with either twin 225hp Deeres or a single 330 to 375hp. Should be able to cruise at less than 10 gph on those don't you think. (10 gph x 200 hours x 2.50/gal. = $5000)
  20. Capt J

    Capt J Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,534
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale
    10 gph at 8 knots is the same fuel burn you'll get on the Viking at the same speeds. The MANs can be a little pricey to maintain and can be a little smokey. Some are some aren't very smokey. A lot depends on if you do the injectors and pump every 1000 hours and how often you run them and run them up to cruise. Keep in mind you will still or should have to run cruise for 30 minutes every 6 hours.

    Watching the world go by at 8 knots is all you'll be doing, running at cruise and getting there and you'll be enjoying your destination, you can choose which you'd prefer and have that option.

    Depending on the circumstances and if it's calm AND providing I have the extra crew, I like running hull speed like Pascal and taking long overnight stabs versus adding a lot of mileage to run in and out of some inlets.

    Some yachts are very stable without stabilizers. In my mind stabilizers a lot of times are a band aid for a poor hull design. Now a seakeeper type for anchoring and slow speeds does help a lot if your drifting or anchored, not very much when running at cruise. You hardly see Sunseekers with stabilizers, why, because they run so great that stabilizers won't really add anything. Old hatteras MYs almost all had stabilizers......well because in a beam or following sea they sure as heck needed them.

    A heavy boat does not equate to a great ride. That is a huge fallacy. It's all about hull design. The custom SF are generally 2/3 the weight of a production SF and they ride incredibly better......