Wandering Sagebrush
Free Range Human
Wefings":1lyg738o said:
Marc, you're getting awfully close to TMI!
Boat value questions
- Thread starter Jericho
- Start date
Marc, you're getting awfully close to TMI!
starcrafttom
Active member
I never got a good report of how the 29 ran and what the fuel burn was. I dont think that its that bad looking but it does look a lot better in the water then on a trailer. the bath room and the steering station were both complete "clusters"
Why did it not sell, well for the same price you could get a 25 ranger tug and be the envy of sailors everywhere or you could get a seasport and be the envy of fisherman everywhere. it did not do anything one thing well.
Why did it not sell, well for the same price you could get a 25 ranger tug and be the envy of sailors everywhere or you could get a seasport and be the envy of fisherman everywhere. it did not do anything one thing well.
Matt Gurnsey, Tell us a bit more about the 29's. Most of the information which was on the web seems to have dissapeared (or at least I cannot find it)--there was some in some albums of members, and a couple of diagrams which may be on the site somewhere.
There are only two 29's on the "our C Dorys" section--one to an owner in New Jersey, and one new one by Sail Annopollis. Sail Annopollis no longer has this boat listed, so I assume that it must have sold, or been sent elsewhere. The boat for sale for $89,000 is in New Jersey, non C Dory dealer has it listed. Someone took a huge hit, if they paid $192,000 plus tax etc for one of these boats and then it is for sale for less than $90,000 currently. Both boats I can account for have a 220 Yanmar engine. This is probably enough to plane these boats.
I don't have that much objection to the outward appearance to the boat--but it is the inside (never been in one)---which seems to be the problem. Poor sight lines, I doubt that 6 can sit comfortably in the dinette (we had a boat with a dinette which sat 6, and it was 6 feet wide x 7 feet long. At that size, it only gave 24" for each person seated--I don't see how the C Dory 29 has that large a dinette. Then there is the "coffin bunk"--I assume that it is under the dinette, but there looks to be very little head room and it appears to be not much bigger than the Ranger 25's.. Altought many of these type of boats are advertised as sleeping 6, the reality is that 4 is more like it. The other objection I have heard about is the step down into the head--apparently the first step is a long one, then a narrow thread.
Anyone spent any time aboard one? I ran all of the threads about the boat and didn't come up with much about performance, except the sea trail, and having a bunch of folks aboard. Apparently the boat planed.
The other objection which many owners will have is that the boat is not easily trailable.
Marc's point is well made. So why haven't the legitimate C Dory dealers carried the C Dory 29, if it is such a great boat?
As for the boats being awkward looking. That is far from the response that I get when people want to see my boat at a gas station or a camp ground. I have had people block my exit from a service station, so they can get a better look at the boat.
There are only two 29's on the "our C Dorys" section--one to an owner in New Jersey, and one new one by Sail Annopollis. Sail Annopollis no longer has this boat listed, so I assume that it must have sold, or been sent elsewhere. The boat for sale for $89,000 is in New Jersey, non C Dory dealer has it listed. Someone took a huge hit, if they paid $192,000 plus tax etc for one of these boats and then it is for sale for less than $90,000 currently. Both boats I can account for have a 220 Yanmar engine. This is probably enough to plane these boats.
I don't have that much objection to the outward appearance to the boat--but it is the inside (never been in one)---which seems to be the problem. Poor sight lines, I doubt that 6 can sit comfortably in the dinette (we had a boat with a dinette which sat 6, and it was 6 feet wide x 7 feet long. At that size, it only gave 24" for each person seated--I don't see how the C Dory 29 has that large a dinette. Then there is the "coffin bunk"--I assume that it is under the dinette, but there looks to be very little head room and it appears to be not much bigger than the Ranger 25's.. Altought many of these type of boats are advertised as sleeping 6, the reality is that 4 is more like it. The other objection I have heard about is the step down into the head--apparently the first step is a long one, then a narrow thread.
Anyone spent any time aboard one? I ran all of the threads about the boat and didn't come up with much about performance, except the sea trail, and having a bunch of folks aboard. Apparently the boat planed.
The other objection which many owners will have is that the boat is not easily trailable.
Marc's point is well made. So why haven't the legitimate C Dory dealers carried the C Dory 29, if it is such a great boat?
As for the boats being awkward looking. That is far from the response that I get when people want to see my boat at a gas station or a camp ground. I have had people block my exit from a service station, so they can get a better look at the boat.
I agree with Bob, we have had many many people (in our short ownership) stop to see the boat. I had a lady pull up to me going 65 on the Interstate blowing her horn. I thought that I had a problem with the boat, so I was a bit scared. I rolled down my window just so she could tell me how much she liked the boat - crazy.
People of all different sorts haved stated "wish we had a boat like that".
So I guess people just like awkward looking boats.
Don and Brenda
New member
At the January 2008 factory gathering, I was able to climb on board of a 29' Venture that was nearly completed. A few items struck me as being poorly thought out in the interior layout. The "lid" of the enclosed head projected above the bottom of the pilot house windows, creating an visual obstruction on the port side of the main cabin. The head compartment door opens directly in front of the co-pilot seat in the main cabin. If this was a house, it would be like having your bathroom door located adjacent to the tv and fireplace in your family room. The "coffin berth" under the dinette has no windows or ports on the exterior side, but instead has a small port that opens into the main cabin. Given the price tag of this boat, I think it is a tough sell in this economy.
For boats of comparable dimensions, the classic 28' Bayliner express cruiser and the 27' Seasport Pilot have more functional layouts. Perhaps we should change the title of this thread to "29' Venture critique"!
Best Regards,
Leo
For boats of comparable dimensions, the classic 28' Bayliner express cruiser and the 27' Seasport Pilot have more functional layouts. Perhaps we should change the title of this thread to "29' Venture critique"!
Best Regards,
Leo
I had a chance to inspect and sea trial an '08 Venture 29' 220 HP last Thursday. These are neat boats, but it looks to me like they came out of the oven a little too soon...
The interior layout worked fine, no problems with the head location and the helm was very comfortable, fit and finish was challenged. I was most impressed by the low noise levels and that's mainly because of the engine placement in the cockpit, the genset (in a sound sheild) was louder...BUT
:shock: There are lateral balance and performance issues :shock:
The interior layout worked fine, no problems with the head location and the helm was very comfortable, fit and finish was challenged. I was most impressed by the low noise levels and that's mainly because of the engine placement in the cockpit, the genset (in a sound sheild) was louder...BUT
:shock: There are lateral balance and performance issues :shock:
Tell us more about the balance and preformance issues? Would have the 265 hp engine made a difference? Do you think that the prop tunnel contributes to some of the issues? What hulls speeds, at what RPM did you see?
Could the "navigator" see foreward over the head compartment if they were 5'4"?
Thanks
Could the "navigator" see foreward over the head compartment if they were 5'4"?
Thanks
I believe the navigator could see over it, I'm 5'8" and had to problem with it whether seated or standing at the helm. It actually works much better than it appears. The port list was my first issue before I boarded her. I checked the bilge first and found only trace water, next I checked the fuel tanks and was surprised to find the port tank was about 1/4 lower (???) I determined the genset & water tank both to port (because of the cave) obviously creates the imbalance. Utilizing the cave for storage would most likely correct this. I was disappointed with the overall interior fit/finish, they needed more practice 
My truck & McClain trailer are in the parking lot ready to load and I have overcome these issues :? So it's time to take her for sea trial...fuel average about 5/8 (more in the stbd for balance), water full, holding empty, three POB, no gear or stores.
Clutch ahead & back down maneuvering was responsive at the wheel and the noise level for a diesel was excellent, the Yanmar is very quiet
and I like it being housed in the cockpit. The bow thruster is very effective but sounded like a rock crusher :?:
Light power (1,200-1,800) is great quiet & displacement speeds to 8k are wonderful...rolling on the power she makes a little more noise, digs a hole, farts & faints
While the radar searches for life on other planets the hole just got deeper, full flaps kills any hope of acceleration, but does allow a view over the bow...turning 3,730 RPM (WOT) (Yanmar specs indicate about 9 gph here). YES, I tried to let her accelerate slowly changing the tabs, but at my wits end, she runs 17.5 Kn and can't make the leap over to plane rather tetters on the edge :shock:
I would like to run the 260HP version, but I'd load her down and see if that was enough to make the leap to plane. My thought is that a lot more is always better...overall
My truck & McClain trailer are in the parking lot ready to load and I have overcome these issues :? So it's time to take her for sea trial...fuel average about 5/8 (more in the stbd for balance), water full, holding empty, three POB, no gear or stores.
Clutch ahead & back down maneuvering was responsive at the wheel and the noise level for a diesel was excellent, the Yanmar is very quiet
and I like it being housed in the cockpit. The bow thruster is very effective but sounded like a rock crusher :?: Light power (1,200-1,800) is great
quiet & displacement speeds to 8k are wonderful...rolling on the power she makes a little more noise, digs a hole, farts & faints While the radar searches for life on other planets the hole just got deeper, full flaps kills any hope of acceleration, but does allow a view over the bow...turning 3,730 RPM (WOT) (Yanmar specs indicate about 9 gph here). YES, I tried to let her accelerate slowly changing the tabs, but at my wits end, she runs 17.5 Kn and can't make the leap over to plane
rather tetters on the edge :shock: I would like to run the 260HP version, but I'd load her down and see if that was enough to make the leap to plane. My thought is that a lot more is always better...overall
Thanks for the great review. The list is probably not a major issue. Batteries could "fix" that. Good to hear about the "view". I suspect that the tunnel is part of the problem. But also if the boat is not planing well at 17.5 knots and 3750 RPM--it is just not going to cut it with that engine.
Agree the extra HP would help, but the 260 is still the same 2.9993 Liter block, with just a bit more turbo boast than the 220. Your 9 gallons per hour is spot on, since at 3750 RPM the 220 is only producing 180 prop hp. The 260 is about 210 prop hp at the same RPM--unfortunately the max torque in both of these engines is at 2500 up to about 3200 (where they are run most of the time)--and not at the top end where you are trying to get over the bow wave. Combine this with the about 20% loss of thrust with the prop pocket/tunnel, there is just not enough HP, and it seems as if the boat would be going "uphill" all of the time--or you would be running near wide open, and have shortened longivity.
With the bigger engine you would be at 10 gallons an hour, maybe 11--Although after the boat is on a plane, if it is not planing well at 17.5 knots, it will take at least that horsepower to be a reasonably "effecient" hull--and that equates to high fuel consumption and short engine lives. Too bad!
Agree the extra HP would help, but the 260 is still the same 2.9993 Liter block, with just a bit more turbo boast than the 220. Your 9 gallons per hour is spot on, since at 3750 RPM the 220 is only producing 180 prop hp. The 260 is about 210 prop hp at the same RPM--unfortunately the max torque in both of these engines is at 2500 up to about 3200 (where they are run most of the time)--and not at the top end where you are trying to get over the bow wave. Combine this with the about 20% loss of thrust with the prop pocket/tunnel, there is just not enough HP, and it seems as if the boat would be going "uphill" all of the time--or you would be running near wide open, and have shortened longivity.
With the bigger engine you would be at 10 gallons an hour, maybe 11--Although after the boat is on a plane, if it is not planing well at 17.5 knots, it will take at least that horsepower to be a reasonably "effecient" hull--and that equates to high fuel consumption and short engine lives. Too bad!
All three batteries were amidships against the stbd gunwale, so the engineers already factored that in. Using old school math at three times hull speed, she was close, and felt close, just couldn't trip her over the top. I feel like the 260 will, just don't know about it loaded.