Good buy?

T

Taran

New member
We are thinking of trading our 2006 C-Dory with newer Honda 90 fuel injected engine and new 8.9 Honda kicker with very low hours for a 1999 Skagit Orca 27XLC with a 7.4 Volvo Penta with 940 hrs on it.
The only reason we would trade our C-Dory is to get better handling in the swells off shore (like to fish Neah Bay). The boat does fine fishing in Puget Sound, but if the water gets rough, we rock alot!
Does the hours listed seem excessive? The Skagit Orca is a great fishing boat.
Thoughts?
 
The Skagit is a bigger, heavier boat. You didn't say how many hours on your 06. Have you considered the difference you are looking at for fuel burn? that may not be important if you are not using many hours per year, or it may be highly important if all or most of your use is fishing out of Neah Bay. Your tow vehicle may also be a consideration. Look at the trailer weight of both and how much you do tow. Do you have 1000 hours on your C-Dory Honda? That may be about a third of it's life. I can't speak to the number of hours you sill get out of Volvo Penta, but there are those on this site who can and probably will.

Good luck on your choices.

Harvey
SleepyC :moon

old_chip_2_GB_324.thumb.jpg
 
I think you say goodbye to economical boating. Volvo parts are not cheap. I suppose this is an outdrive. The outdrive if this boat is so equipped would be a deal breaker for me. Like Harvey said this boat is more than likely a whole bunch heavier than your C-Dory. Plus the boat is 16 years old. Not something I would do. I would keep your boat and find someone else with a bigger boat and offer to help with expenses in exchange for them taking you out on Neah Bay. JMHO. You have wonder what the bigger boat will be worth in five years. I bet your C-Dory would still bring a good dollar.
D.D.
 
I'm a big fan of the Skagit Orca. Totally different boat than a 22' c-dory but also more appropriate for going offshore out of Neah Bay. They're big and heavy and popular with charter captains for a reason. The big block Orca is going to burn a lot more fuel as I'm sure you already realize.

I've heard of some problems with rotten stringers in some of the older boats but not clear how common that problem is.

They come up for sale sometimes and they obviously hold their value very well. Value wise, its probably a good trade if its a straight across deal. Have the lower unit checked out and a compression test done on the motor. I would also have the hull surveyed by a marine surveyor. Good luck I'm excited for you.
 
Taran":2ohjqq64 said:
We are thinking of trading our 2006 C-Dory with newer Honda 90 fuel injected engine and new 8.9 Honda kicker with very low hours for a 1999 Skagit Orca 27XLC with a 7.4 Volvo Penta with 940 hrs on it.
The only reason we would trade our C-Dory is to get better handling in the swells off shore (like to fish Neah Bay). The boat does fine fishing in Puget Sound, but if the water gets rough, we rock alot!
Does the hours listed seem excessive? The Skagit Orca is a great fishing boat.
Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I fished for many years (8-10?) out of Neah Bay in my previous 22 and I'm stilling fishing Neah Bay in my Tomcat. The deeper V and heavier weight of the Orca will certainly get you out through chop much faster but you'll pay for that in increased fuel cost (probably about 2x as much, maybe a tad more). Costs to maintain the boat will be about 2x what you are paying now due to the increased length, volvo engine and general increase in complexity.

You'll have a ton more room to sleep and eat in the 27XLC and you'll have a real head. You'll also have a much larger range due to tanks that hold 167 gallons of fuel, real storage for fish etc. On a troll, the Orca may not feel more stable - especially in swells from the side. Ditto for when 2 or 3 people attempt to work off of one side of the boat.

When I switched from my 22 to my Tomcat, a lot of new fishing adventures became possible due to both the increased speed and the increased range. You'll get the same from the Orca. For me that means that I spend even more than the 2x I mentioned above but it also means I'm doing things I could never effectively do in my 22 (like tuna fishing 60-80 miles out from Neah Bay).

So if you're really into fishing out there AND you can afford the extra gas and maintenance costs, it might be the right boat for you. Me personally, I wouldn't buy an I/O as I think it's far easier to properly maintain an outboard and I just don't like the idea of a hole in the hull below the water line to get the lower unit out. But I wouldn't write off the 22 as a boat for Neah Bay. You just need to pick your days. In August, 4 days out of 5 are nicer on the ocean than in the Strait of Juan de Fuca but you need to get about 1 mile past Tatoosh to find that out. When it's nastier outside, you can generally fish in the shadow of Tatoosh. If I didn't have a partner who was splitting costs with me on the Tomcat, I'd probably rather have my 22. It was much cheaper to operate, required less maintenance and was easier for me to work on.
 
Good pointers!
Makes our current C-Dory sound much better in the long run. It is easy for us to launch and retrieve and do LOVE the new fuel injected Honda. It starts on the first try every time.
Plus, it is now paid off! :P
 
No point repeating some of the many good ideas already offered, so I'll add just one:

If I remember right, the path on the Skagit Orcas from the helm to the stern involves at least three height/level transitions (counting the steps).

Not too bad if you have a cockpit steering station for trolling, but otherwise, I'd get very tired scrambling up and down over the bumpy terrain. (I even did when examining the boat at the boat show!)

Plus you get a high cockpit floor much more above the water than the 22.

One of the great features of the CD-22 is the level playing field/flat floor from the cockpit to the helm. The KISS Principle Wins, Again!

Add in the fact that in the 22 you're always standing on the bottom of the (outer) hull, and not elevated up in the air on a raised false floor which now features lowed gunnels around you.

For both these reasons, the CD-22 feels much more natural and secure. E.G.: down low, securely contained, and easy to move about.

At least to an old sailor like myself.

JM2CW! :lol:

Joe. :teeth :thup
 
I think this is a great boat. I love them. Solid, better ride, at least going into the chop. It takes a lot more HP--I don't know exactly what your specific engine is running, but most of the 454's (7.4L) are getting anywhere from about 300 to 400 hp. (Injection vs carbs, valves, etc)

I had a 300 hp I/O boat, with the same deadrise same length, and about 2000 lbs lighter than the Orca before I bought the Tom Cat. Things to think about. My fuel burn at 3500 RPM was 15 gallons an hour. The boat didn't plane until about 18knots. The fuel burn at "semi displacement speed"(where you might try to run if it is really rough)--was significantly higher. In tests often it runs about 1 miles per gallon at the 13 knot speed range. My best average for that boat was 1.6 mpg. At times it was closer to 1 mile per gallon. Compare that with what you have for the C Dory 22. Compare the planing speed. These are two major factors. But there are more.

Have you tried to work on the starter or water pump on the 454 in a boat?

Also folks forget, even with a fresh water cooled engine, you still have to replace the risers and manifolds on a regular basis: Iron and hot salt water!

Leaving an I/O boat in salt water: corrosion is an issue. Cannot flush the lower unit easily. Have to have antifouling on the I/O. Cannot run the I/O at a raised position because of potential Gimbal bearing damage. Danger of leak around the boot of the I/O. I left the i/O boat which I owned in Florida on a lift. In Calif, I had several I/O boats, and had issues with the drive on both of them.

So, despite of how much I like the boat--I would vote against it. But I am prejudiced.
 
Sea Wolf":2wkau23n said:
Plus you get a high cockpit floor much more above the water than the 22.

... in the 22 you're always standing on the bottom of the (outer) hull, and not elevated up in the air on a raised false floor which now features lowed gunnels around you.

For both these reasons, the CD-22 feels much more natural and secure. E.G.: down low, securely contained, and easy to move about.
Click to expand...

Since Taran's 22 is a 2006, it may or may not have the "standing low on top of the hull" cockpit sole. Sometime around that year, the 22 gained a "permanent" flat cockpit sole that is raised above hull level (in order to make it flat and somewhat self-draining). it's not super high, but it is a noticeable difference. Reason I say this is that I have the hull level sole, but then optional floorboards that bring the cockpit sole up to around the level of the later, "permanent" flat sole -- so I can have either in my boat. They're each a different feel.

There are plusses and minuses to each configuration, of course. At any rate after around 2006-2007 (not sure exact time) the 22's all have the "permanent" raised/flat cockpit sole.
 
We just made a similar change, but only have about 30 hours on the Skagit Orca in the last month after putting 100 hours on the 22 Cruiser last year.

We have confirmed we prefer the deep-V hull. Ours has a VP D4-260, which provides for nice cruising speeds at reasonable efficiency. We are enjoying the increased capabilities...storage, head, tankage, stand at helm, ride, speed, quiet, etc. I have had the opportunity to go through the boat pretty thoroughly, and I have not discovered any disappointments related to the design, quality, or materials.

I am not putting aside the 22 Cruiser at all...it was the perfect boat for our missions and we really enjoyed it. We had some mission creep - wanting to cover more distance in rougher water during our limited time off - that necessitated the change.

The biggest considerations have been mentioned; operating costs and maintenance. If the hours are a significant concern (perhaps incomplete service history or unknown usage), consider having an experienced technician go through the engine and drive. I recommend an oil analysis as well, it can be expedited. You could make "inspection of the engine/drive to the satisfaction of the purchaser" a contingency for the sale.

There is another 27XLC for sale at Boat Country in Everett. We looked at her in November and found her in good shape. The asking price has not changed since then...I would think it is soft at this stage.

Best Wishes
 
Well, we sold our Dory to a very nice couple from Alaska (contacted us 1/2 hr after listed on Craigslist).
We are now weighing a 24 ft Orca with Honda 225 outboard vs 27 ft Orca with low hrs Volva Penta 8.2L I/O.
I am thinking the Honda will be a lot less gas guzzling?
Would appreciate advice from folks. Love the Brats!
 
It may come down to ease of service. Which dealer is nearest and preferred?

I suspect if taken care of, that Honda will not require much in the way of routine maintenance. The big outboards have a terrific reputation. Does the 24 have diesel heat?

The I/O will certainly require occasional bellows and other professional attention. An added benefit is it will provide cabin heat and hot domestic water. That's a good-size motor for this boat, so it should have a decent life span.

If all else were equal, I would probably take the Honda O/B over gas I/O.

I will offer that I am glad we found a 27 as we prefer the extra length in the cockpit.
 
The ob will be easier than an IO to maintain, and it's less complex, fuel burn on the ob may be less.
When going to these kind of hulls and power requirements, it is generally understood that gas is not an issue. It takes what it takes If one figures 1mpg at worst and 1.3 mpg at best you won't be far off
I had a friend with a 27' Orca w/ twin big outboards who would spend $600 on a weekend for gas. Cdn gas being $5 or more a gallon
He couldn't have cared less. For me it would be an issue. I recently read in a boating magazine of a new SeaRay being "economical "as it "only" burned 24 gallons per hour each engine at 45 mph almost but not quite 1mpg. As suggested retail was a million bucks, fuel burn is not an issue.
Have fun with whatever you decide
George
 
I would lean towards the 24" outboard Skagit, over the I/O 27 personally.

The potential for expensive repairs and service on the I/O systems is the reason I'd go that way. Of course its not my decision and both boats are pretty drool worthy!
 
Back
Top