2005 hatteras 50 convertible

What would you like to know? I’ve run a few of them

I would like to hear you compare it against your favorite fifty footer - a 50’ Post.

I've run a few 50' Hatteras in that era. They ran best with C18's, the 3412/C30 boats were much heavier and rode heavier and much thirstier for not much speed gain 3-4 knots. They're 2 totally different boats the post and the hatteras. Honestly, the 54' Hatteras SF from that era is a far superior riding boat to both the Post and the 50' Hatteras. I don't think the Post is the best 50' out there, but it is for the money (they're efficient (you can't beat 27 knots at 55 gph in a 50' SF), good ride, fairly fast, roomy, built well etc., cockpit laid out nice, but a little wet), but I'd rather have a 52' Cabo SF or 54' Hatt SF dollars aside, I ran a 52' Cabo SF with C18's with only a hardtop that was a really nice running boat but only cruised at 27 I think, but both of those are double the price of the post or 50' hatt.

Anyways back to the 50' Hatteras. It cruises around 30 knots at 85 gph with C18's in it. It pounds and rides very average when completely full of fuel and is a little wet until you dump the 200 gallon bow fuel tank into the main, I'd do that as quick as possible, then it rides pretty good and really starts shining when the main tank gets down to 2/3 or less on fuel. They're stable and very solid, you will get some backdraft......the cockpit is pretty spartan in fishing amenities with the fishbox underneath where the footrest would be for a fighting chair, one cabinet with a few tackle drawers and a livewell and that's about it......cockpit is roomy, boat is roomy overall with a pretty good layout......But for most usage, there would be no reason to even use the bow fuel tank, aside from long trips.

Quality is equal in both boats, performance is very similar as well, ride is a little different. The Hatteras is better in a head sea, the 50' Viking of the early 2000s, I ran one and it rocked and rolled quite a bit at slow speeds and was just a hard top boat. It had 1050 mans and was very fast, 37 knot cruise. If you can swing it, I'd look at the 52' Cabo SF or 54' Hatteras or even a 50' Post and compare...….

Fiberglass is the way to go. They last in most cases the life of the boat, whereas depending on location the aluminum tanks rot and start leaking 10-20 years old or sometimes older and need to be replaced which is a major feat.

I was in your place a few years back before I purchased my 50 post .I looked at the Hatteras, Viking, post, and cavileer offerings in the size range. The post won out based on bang for the buck, economy of fuel, and interior volume. Lost out in wet ride in a head sea, but that's the trade off. With my 3406e CATs, I'm seeing 25 kts and 50-52 gals/hr. at 1885 rpms, 26.5 kts at 1975 rpms and 55 gals/hr. I usually run around 1850 or so. The 820 MAN boats are faster with comparable burn, but I don't like MAN for service by me . Either way, it's probably the lightest fuel burn for a 50 outside of a custom Carolina, but if you're not fishing, it's a waste due to the big loss in interior volume.

I just was out in the NE canyons two days ago and got my butt handed to me in 8-12' seas when a good blow came through early Friday am. I stuffed the bow, went well past 45° rolls a few times, had 2 solid waves crash on my beam, and the boat took it all and got me home safe and sound. Although it was 10kts all the way home. I'm not saying the other boats wouldn't handle it, but I'm glad my boat did.

If it's in your budget, look at the newer 53 or 56 for some additional interior room.

Had a 2002 Hatteras 50C with 3412's. Nice boat with an ok ride. Comfortable boat for cruising but a very tight engine room and would not do again. C-18's would be my choice. Typical Hatteras quality. Agree with Capt J, fiberglass tanks best on any boat.

Tank materials each have their place. Production tanks can lend themselves to frp construction, especially if they have odd shapes.you have less concern over water coming into contact with the tank surfaces due to the corrosion resistance properties of frp, and a production boatbuilder has expertise in frp construction anyways. They are heavier and you typically don’t see them in large yachts like Westports, etc.

Aluminum tanks have been used forever in production boats, the builder needs to ensure that water or moisture can not contact bare surfaces and the best aluminum tanks are coated. You have to have the bottoms raised on neoprene or equivalent strips with drainage on the tank platform and proper air circulation. A builder who does it right will get long life out of aluminum, especially if they use a 1/4” bottom. Most production aluminum tanks are too thin in my opinion, unless they are for commercially inspected (USCG) vessels, which require at least 1/4” from bottom to top. If that is what’s required for the commercial guys, why not use it for the recreational guys would be my advice, even though you would encure a weight penalty, but less so than an frp tank.

My biggest pet peeve is seeing the return line fittings right next to the supply line fitting on top of the tank. The return and supply should be as far apart as practical and accessible, you do not want hot return fuel heating your supply fuel at the pick-up Point, Some builders group them all at a single access point/hatch but I don’t subscribe to that practice.

Any reason why the 54' Bertram is not in the comparison? I'm not a sportfish expert, but curious.

The OP is looking for a newer SF. The closest thing in that size/year would be a 57' Bertram, which there's a good chance of the boat self destructing underneath your feet. The delamination and bulkhead breaking issues (which led to the former Bertram's demise) was all in that era. The 57' also was not a great running boat either, very wet, the COG was too far forward. The only way they ran decent was 1/2 tank or less fuel, holding tank dead empty. I ran a 2004 that was new, within 3 trips all of the bulkhead tabbing broke loose from all of the bulkheads, and the boat was oil canning, owner got rid of it and got a 61' Viking, and this was before word was out that they were all coming apart. I know of 13 57's and 63's that self destructed to some degree. Bertram swept a lot of them under the rug, until there just became too many to do so and word got out.

As for the earlier 54's, many issues with soft decks, and just a hap hazard engine room layout requiring you to stop on one item to access another item all over the engine room. I've never liked those either.

Sorry to get off-topic, but I have to ask: What does "the boat was oil canning" mean? I've never heard that expression before.

Stringers move usually fore and aft when the boat is underway, the entire hull is bending and moving, usually breaking bulkhead tabbing but can occur without breaking it if laid up correctly but not supported enough. Basically the entire hull is shifting as the boat is underway and bending on the rigid parts eventually breaking free tabbing and such.

I found this online, take it to a more extreme context as your knot pressing a hull bottom with your hand or knee and causing it:
Constant flexing of unsupported fiberglass panels will crack the gel coat and may fracture the laminate itself. The suspect areas can be tested by pressing against the hull with hands or knee.

www.craigmarine.info/boating/Fiberglass-Hulls.htm

Thanks, Capt J.

Underway, your planing hull bottom experiences pressure forces that are generally pushing up. Your stringers will move up and down as the bottom experiences these pressure forces. If you have a safe place to sit, you can observe this underway or sometimes through a hatch looking from somewhere accessible in the interior.
This is all dependent on bottom frp thickness, stringer width and height (section modulus, technically), stringer spacing and bulkhead and/or transverse frame spacing, as well as materials.
If the combination is engineered and built well, bottom panel flex and stringer vertical movement is minimal . But mess up one step in the system, and it is another story.

I have seen frp passenger vessels designed and built to abs class rules by well known builders have their stringers move 3” vertically at their 30knot cruise speed, nothing ever happened in 20 years on that boat, as frp materials can be quite resilient. They “danced” quite a bit but never failed. It was a bit disconcerting to observe until you got “used to it”.

Now an unreinforced, relatively thin bulkhead can deform when crashing through waves at high speeds. Especially closely placed short wave periods. Things like bulkhead thickness, the proximity of the nearest other bulkhead or transverse frame, the method and layers of bulkhead tabbing to the inner hull sides and stringers matter. As the pressure load goes from the bottom hull plate, to the stringers, and then the nearest bulkhead, something may give if the system has a weak point. The bulkhead may flex or belly out then collapse as it stresses the tabbing to the hull resulting in a “blown-out” or oil-canned panel (the bulkhead). The tabbing is usually then pulled away from the bulkhead and or innermost hull sides.

Remember that happening to some in the GOM on the early Ocean Yacht sf models....better know as Flexible Flyers.....along with some other well know builders having stringer/bulkhead delamination issues too.....mostly on sf' boats driven too hard in choppy seas.

Sorry but I have an issue with a statement of a "boat being driven too hard in choppy seas". Unless there are written exclusions of a SF's capabilities, it should handle and take what a captain feels is safe. I was involved with a yacht that had an overheating exhaust issue. This was because of a very bad exhaust designed and then installed by the builder. When I did my bi-annual trip to Taiwan and China, the owner of the company blamed the captain for the temperature issue. he said " it's the captain's fault, he runs the boat too slow". Of course I will not name the builder, but a boat should not be limited within it's capabilities. Looking forward to comments.

Jorge, over the years there have been many boats damaged because the operator did not reduce speed in rough conditions. Just ask most any boat yard. I am referring to SF's fishing offshore, mostly in tournaments running hard for lines in or to make weigh-in. Surely you have heard of the old saying, "ran hard and put up wet".