General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

General boating discussion
Karl in NY
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:30 pm

General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#1

Post by Karl in NY » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:29 pm

I realize this is not in the same class as a custom 1/4" welded-plate boat, but those are totally out of reach financially, being retired with a pension which could disappear tomorrow, along with healthcare...food on the table takes priority over buying an expensive, fuel-hungry boat. My prime reservation is the Ocean Pro is only self-bailing for foredeck, cockpit drains into bilge.

That said, I would like to migrate away from the F-word hulls...I have a bad back, too, and typical forward seating will be painful without good suspension seats. If I were building, I would go for a center-mounted pilothouse, but they don't seem to be an off-the-shelf item in alloy, just in the F-word, and very few at that.

Use: 130 mile-long lake with constant chop, since I'm at northern tip, and current is from south, as are most major winds.
Boat would be dry-docked in boathouse unless actually in use.

My ideal configuration would be similar to poster Chaps' 24' LaConner...Maritime offers a similar configuration in the F-word...but, no inventory and built only upon receipt of order, plus, recently changed ownership.
http://www.maritimeboats.com/23_Voyager.html

Options welcomed...BTW, fishing is actually low-priority for me, but low-maintenance is high-priority.

Chaps
Donator '09
Posts: 2138
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:19 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#2

Post by Chaps » Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:02 pm

Low deadrise, forward mounted pilothouse boats are a rough ride in heavy chop, no way around that, alloy or fibberglass. Not sure what you are using the boat for but moving the house as far aft as possible makes a huge difference in comfort if steep wind waves is your everyday deal. A custom boat from a small builder with low overhead is your solution IMO. Those Maritimes are neat boats, there is one here local but shocking what they charge for those buggers.

I'm working on a Hewescraft OP 220 right now, seems to be a decent enough boat for the money but lack of self bailing would be a killer for me. I think they have a model that bails but might be a bigger more expensive one.

The LaConner has been a great boat and it does pretty well in chop. Part of that is the weight, for its size its a decent wave crusher. It also keeps its nose down when going into the wind and I've got an old school suspension seat that makes up for any real slamming.

I may put it up for sale this year so if its something that would work for you give that some thought. I'm on the fence about another boat that has caught my eye . . . who knows . . .
1987 24' LaConner pilothouse workboat, 225 Suzuki
Image
please view and like: https://www.facebook.com/bottompainting/

kmorin
Donator 08','09,'10,'11,'12,'13,'14,'15,'16,'17,'18'
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Kenai, Alaska

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#3

Post by kmorin » Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:59 pm

Karl, I've passed retirement age, have some vertebrae (3rd, 4th, 5th Lumbar) that were "negatively impacted" by thinking I was bullet proof as a young oil field welder. (for the record I was not bullet proof and the ruptured/herniated discs of one's low back are a real "pain in the back"!)

So my remark is about your post. And there's a simple solution absolutely staring you in the face!

Go Slow. Just don't plane the boat- in fact don't even bother to get, or power a planing boat- just go at displacement speeds and enjoy the ride!! NO hydraulic or pneumatic seats, no 1,000 gallon fuel tanks- skip the four (4) 300 hp (three hundred horse power) outboards, and : ACT OUR AGE..... don't try to fly on the water with the accompanying Reynolds Number (water is as hard as concrete if you'll just hit it at a high enough speed) just ease through the water, enjoy the trip and skip planing boats altogether.

Simple to afford a little displacement boat, just skip the speed component- you'll save enough to afford a boat that will last longer than either of us?

Cheers,
Kevin Morin
Kenai, AK
kmorin

Karl in NY
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:30 pm

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#4

Post by Karl in NY » Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:01 pm

Chaps: the age of your boat scares me a little, as does shipping costs from Seattle to Rouses Point, NY, plus there is no support for Suzuki...I drive a Suzuki SX-4 for a winter car, and service and parts are starting to get scarce. I agree that the Maritimes are in the platinum price range, and even living in a neighboring state, there are zero on the used market.

Kevin: I agree with your comments, and I do act my age, including the hearing aids and suspenders!
I think I could adapt to displacement speeds, plus I spend a lot of time anchored, whenever I can get a usable WiFi signal. I use directional high-gain yagis at both home and on the boat, and can receive my own signal at least 25 miles away, with a little FCC cheating involved. I'll never slow down in a car (it's a DNA thing), but could enjoy "smelling the roses" in a boat at this point, and would not even rule-out a small trawler at 8-knots.

kmorin
Donator 08','09,'10,'11,'12,'13,'14,'15,'16,'17,'18'
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Kenai, Alaska

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#5

Post by kmorin » Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:24 am

Karl, I'm not saying act your age- I'm saying at OUR age speed is expensive and "hurts the wallet AND the back". Speed is (IMO) for youth- whose carcasses can take a little banging and slamming. The Hewes is a planning hull that has flat to 'no' entry and at speed (why bother?) will beat you to jelly in a head sea. You'd end up slowing down to a walk anyway- why use that hull form?

When you drop speed/slamming/high Reynolds Numbers(?) the bottom framing scantlings can be reduced 15-25% depending on hull form. That's money saved. The fuel to push isn't proportionally lowered- its fractional. A 16' runabout going 30 mph takes 4 to 8x the fuel it does to move that same skiff at 8 mph. So tankage, engines.... and so forth all become less volume and cost.

Just remarking about the class of hull; the Hewes is intended to plane. While on the mid market for cost or even lower market for welded metal planing skiff shapes- my focus was that if you take all the speed considerations away- a welded aluminum cruiser is likely to be much less expensive for the same LOA and level of finish.

With that said, I have no - none, nada, any, zero idea if there is anyone in your near geography who would build or does build a trailerable displacement speed welded aluminum boat? (!) so my remarks may be useless to your considerations, just another point of view to share in the mix when discussing welded boats' designs.

Cheers,
Kevin Morin
Kenai, AK
kmorin

Sobie2
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:27 pm
Location: Juneau, AK

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#6

Post by Sobie2 » Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:11 pm

You are in luck! I used to own a Hewescraft OceanPro, powered with a Yamaha F150. I also put a set of Doel Fin hydrofoils on the boat. It allowed the boat to maintain a planing speed of 12 or 12 knots. So in the really sloppy stuff I just slowed down to semi-displacement speed, and the boat performed really well by parting the waves.

True enough my 23' and 27' NON ALLOY Uniflites were 10x the sea boat as an aluminum Hewescraft.

My OP had the midlevel suspension seats but when I get another Hewes... probably the new Hewescraft OceanPro 240 it will have the super suspension seats. The Hewescraft Alaskan models are even better in the slop. IF you can go look and see the SeaRunner, OceanPro, and Alaskan all on the same lot and see the difference in person. 1/4" plate is not necessary 3/16" all the way around is still super stout.

I live in Southeast AK and we have short interval, steep, chop (usually in the 4-8' range). The boat handles that kind of stuff really well and the front bow almost never saw green water because of the bow geometry. Unlike most people, I would never buy a self draining deck. My father in-law is a marine surveyor and every hear he has sinker damage cases from self draining decks because boats get overloaded and the scupper become big holes that let water in. I also never took waves over the back deck that amounted to much. If you are taking seas and need a self draining deck you are more likely going to roll her over than sink from taking on that much water.

Sobie2

Karl in NY
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:30 pm

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#7

Post by Karl in NY » Thu Apr 13, 2017 2:42 pm

I hate to rely on something as unreliable as a bilge pump, even running 3 of them, on different circuits.

It's amazing, but I have a cast-iron sump-pump (Zoeller) in my home, with a Rule automatic as back-up, and it has run faithfully for 23 years, ditto for my last home. Boat pumps are designed to fail quickly, whether bilge, washdown, or livewell.

Chtucker
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:14 pm

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#8

Post by Chtucker » Thu Apr 13, 2017 9:10 pm

Sobie2 wrote:
Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:11 pm
You are in luck! I used to own a Hewescraft OceanPro, powered with a Yamaha F150. I also put a set of Doel Fin hydrofoils on the boat. It allowed the boat to maintain a planing speed of 12 or 12 knots. So in the really sloppy stuff I just slowed down to semi-displacement speed, and the boat performed really well by parting the waves.

True enough my 23' and 27' NON ALLOY Uniflites were 10x the sea boat as an aluminum Hewescraft.

My OP had the midlevel suspension seats but when I get another Hewes... probably the new Hewescraft OceanPro 240 it will have the super suspension seats. The Hewescraft Alaskan models are even better in the slop. IF you can go look and see the SeaRunner, OceanPro, and Alaskan all on the same lot and see the difference in person. 1/4" plate is not necessary 3/16" all the way around is still super stout.

I live in Southeast AK and we have short interval, steep, chop (usually in the 4-8' range). The boat handles that kind of stuff really well and the front bow almost never saw green water because of the bow geometry. Unlike most people, I would never buy a self draining deck. My father in-law is a marine surveyor and every hear he has sinker damage cases from self draining decks because boats get overloaded and the scupper become big holes that let water in. I also never took waves over the back deck that amounted to much. If you are taking seas and need a self draining deck you are more likely going to roll her over than sink from taking on that much water.

Sobie2
Scuppers that take on water because of heavy loads are a design flaw in my mind. My scuppers sit at least 6-8" above the waterline. Even with my fish boxes completely flooded (intentionally) and 3 fat guys in the corner, I could net get it to take on water.

JonH
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 12:20 pm
Location: Houston / Ketchikan

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#9

Post by JonH » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:30 pm

The scuppers on my 28' boat (which is approaching the final design phase) are 12" above the static waterline.

Jon

kmorin
Donator 08','09,'10,'11,'12,'13,'14,'15,'16,'17,'18'
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Kenai, Alaska

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#10

Post by kmorin » Fri Apr 14, 2017 1:57 pm

Karl, there's lots to be explored in the thread- given the many facets of the discussion. I'll just address the theoretical aspects of a sealed or self bailing (after) deck for the class of boats we're discussing <24' LOA outboard powered.

Just a note about Jon's 28' in design. I'd personally separate the two boats' discussion because of the overall displacement differences. I'd expect the 28' to have displacement in the 12-15k lb class? and the <24' LOA, especially the Hewes to be in the 5-6k lb. class? So at 1/2 the displacement PLUS the waterplanes' relative area an "inch of immersion" in the larger boat is vastly more displacement than the smaller. Because of that factor; a gallon of water on deck on one hull is not 'equal' to a gallon on deck of the other- apples to apples perhaps(?) but bushels to lunch bags of comparison of the effects of one gallon on deck due to the percent of displacement of the two hulls due to size.

Karl, self bailing decks' performance emptying deck wash are related to freeing ports or "scuppers" (that word is used in different ways in some areas) size or volumetric flow; that determines how fast the water on deck would be shed back overboard for any given sealed deck design.

There are several conditions to consider- say the free flow of the ports is 100 gallon/min and you ship less than 50 gallons? That will drain overboard in a short time, and perhaps the sea state is not replacing the shipped water? In this case the hull's overall buoyancy will 'lift' or drain the water off the deck before more comes aboard. By working the variables, of amount of water shipped, amount of time for bailing the deck, and the amount of time before another volume ships? you can see that at come combination even the most robust design can be swamped to the deck level - or a full cockpit/after deck awash to the gunwales if the sea state is rough enough.

This would be like running before a breaking sea with inadequate power to fully maneuver bow too, or quartering by the bow; or too little power to out run the surf if the heading is before the waves.

Stability turns on the discussion of what effect the buoyancy under the deck has on the boat's performance while the stern (at least) is wash? This is where the 'turtle' event can happen. The reason for this is the boat's water line is now nearly to the gunwale (assuming she's not sunk by flooding the cabin and forward spaces?) therefore any rolling action of waves acts to allow the bottom's air chamber to continue to roll the boat over. IF the buoyancy of the air under the deck is not under the center of gravity the hull will have that force as a roll over lever. Therefore, if nearly awash, or swamped, the sealed deck in a rolling beam seaway- can contribute to the hull turning over. It should be considered though; that all the time that same volume is acting to drain the decks by lifting the hull (metal bubble) and shedding water out the ports- a condition not present when the bilges are already filled.

I'm not saying this would be common, I was just reviewing the series of sequential stages of operation of the sealed deck boat design as it performs in heavy weather- and as the weather becomes more and more lumpy- what would happen when the entire cockpit were awash.

However, up to the sea state when you're totally filled in an after deck design, the sealed deck continues to lift nearly vertically and acts to drain the deck of water, where the open bilge does not. Unless the pumps, any pumps, are very large capacity, freeing ports will empty the deck load of water faster than the pumps will lift up from the bilges and pump overboard.

I'm ignoring the free water effect of 'slosh' (free surface effect of the shipped water) of the deck 1/2 full of water as that complicates the discussion quite a bit.

Freeing ports that have one-way flow can be installed, there are numerous types to purchase and others of larger size can be built if the boat will regularly be in sea states with water on deck. Only a larger section freeing port would justify shop built types like those installed on ocean going commercial fishing boats that need to empty their decks fast to retain stability due to the deck lines being nearly at their gunwales. These ports have a large horizontal hinged plate that swings out at the bottom when water is inboard but they 'float' closed when the waterline rises to that level.

Karl, just some remarks about sealed decks vs drain to bilge decks in regards very rough weather performance. In the Gulf of Alaska and most of the bays and bights in our Cook Inlet "neck of the woods" neither design of boat takes much water on deck and we do see some lumpy weather. I've built both but only the commercial fishing skiffs have ever needed their internal flotation and that was due to extreme loading in heavy seas NOT from sport fishing conditions.

If you decide to explore a cruising design, traveling at displacement speeds, some of the money saved in buying huge horse power outboard could go toward large freeing ports for a sealed deck- allowing you a dry bilge and peace of mind at the same time?

Cheers,
Kevin Morin
Kenai, AK
Last edited by kmorin on Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typo's
kmorin

JonH
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 12:20 pm
Location: Houston / Ketchikan

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#11

Post by JonH » Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:24 pm

Kevin's points are excellent, as always.

In addition to scuppers being high enough above the waterline, if the boat is designed with the deck sloping slightly aft that will help
move the water aft (and out) faster. Also, if the cabin sole of the boat is higher, say 6" - 8", than the aft deck that can help with down flooding
in severe condition although it is harder to do on smaller boats.

Jon

Reel Music
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:29 am

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#12

Post by Reel Music » Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:06 pm

I have the 2015 version of the Ocean Pro. Here are my observations.

Pretty stable low speed boat. I do a lot of trolling and even in the rollie pollie standing wave slop the boat is stable.( not a ton of side to side rocking) The trade off is that it can be a rough rider in the standing chop. The dead rise and flatter bottom being the culprit. After riding in boats with more dead rise I decided this was better for me because those boats pitched and rolled too much for my liking at trolling speeds.

When it is sloppy, and I'm heading into the waves, and thats a lot where I fish, I find that I have the outboard trimmed down all the way and also end up using a fair amount of tabs to get a good ride. 3' short interval waves aren't uncommon and I can cruise at about 15 knots maybe a little less. Running back down with the waves I can trim it up to get a good soft ride. Quartering is fine with the tabs but I still get the occasional slam against the side of the boat.

The boat itself is fine. Pretty well laid out, no real complaints about that. I do like the fact that I can climb out onto the bow without having to go round the pilot house. Storage is O.K.. There seems to be a lot of wasted space up under the bow but I have two in deck fish boxes up there so maybe that's the reason ?

What I don't like...... The downriver mounts are too tall and in an awkward spot. In addition the rails that attach to them are too short to add a rail mounted rod holder if you stack rods on the downriggers. The kicker mount could be mounted a little more inboard for a single engine application. It leaves the kicker too close to the port side when you dock. They give you a different key for every damn lock on the boat. I have like 20 of them !!!!!

That's all I got for ya.Hope it helps.

Karl in NY
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:30 pm

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#13

Post by Karl in NY » Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:47 am

Reel Music wrote:
Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:06 pm

The boat itself is fine. Pretty well laid out, no real complaints about that. I do like the fact that I can climb out onto the bow without having to go round the pilot house. Storage is O.K.. There seems to be a lot of wasted space up under the bow but I have two in deck fish boxes up there so maybe that's the reason ?
That's a very appealing feature, and the main reason I dislike walk-arounds, like my present Seaswirl...side decks are too narrow to safely access bow in rough water, why I finally added a "Good"-brand drum windlass, since the rode doesn't need to be cleated-off like conventional windlasses require...actually typical of virtually all drum-style wndlasses, but they have not gained popularity in the US, but the Aussies and Kiwis love them...some of theirs' now are imported, with poor distribution, but the Good and at least one other (EZ) are made here, and there was another that kept going out of business then company sold and new owner did same thing...forget the brand. Many use Warn or Ramsey motors and gear trains and adapt them to stainless drums.

OceanPro220
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: General opinion of Hewescraft Ocean Pro?

#14

Post by OceanPro220 » Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:48 pm

As an owner of a 2016 Ocean Pro for about a year now. I have nothing negative to say about the boat. We have the Hard Top with Bulkhead door and extended transom. We have a Yamaha F200XB and a Yamaha 9.9 High Thrust as our power units.
Our primary fishing area is the straits of Juan De Fuca and if anyone has ever fished there then they will know how bad it can get there when the wind gets up. We have been more than happy with our boat regarding space, safety and general overall features.
The boat handles the chop effortlessly and we've often been out in 6' swells coming back from Hein or Dallas bank. Never once did we take in water in the aft area and with the F200 Yamaha with 15" pitch prop she literally flies on top of the water.

We looked at Duckworth, Raider, Kingfisher, Crozier Craft, Lee Shore, Armstrong etc when we were shopping and none of them could come near the Hewescraft for the dollars spent. Great boat and looking forward to having it for many years to come.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic