I find myself nearly always agreeing with John Marshall whose reasoned, intuitive approach to boatkeeping and whose literate, articulate posts resonate very well with me. This time, however, I have to say I think John missed the boat. Like Tim, I've owned a half-dozen wet exhaust boats over several decades and have rarely had a problem with an inhabitable cockpit due to exhaust. The only time a problem arises, it seems, is when the wind is from abraft the beam (don't you love that phrase?!) at greater than the yacht's speed, and on the rare occasion when that occurs it's usually easy to alter course to give the cockpit party clear air. My Nordhavn 47 is the only one (so far!) with wet exhaust, and there's no way I'd trade it for a dry stack boat. The fine folks at PAE told me a dry stack boat was the way to go, but I persisted and ended up with a great wet exhaust boat and have not looked back. Over 18,000 miles in 4 years, including an ocean-crossing and a lot of putt-putting along various coasts in Europe, the Caribbean, the Bahamas, and the USA, I have yet to have a problem of consequence from my wet exhaust system. If I were ordering a new yacht of any kind today there's no question that I'd spec wet exhaust. Tim's right: having the exhaust exit the boat on the quarter all but eliminates exhaust problems in the cockpit. He's right again that the wet vs. dry debate goes on and on. There is no single right answer. I admit it's best to be less dogmatic than I am on the subject. Something I like very much about our cruising/yachting lifestyle is that there are no absolute answers on questions like this. There's every bit as much evidence supporting dry stack as wet exhaust, and it all comes down to what you prefer--or, perhaps more important, what you have experience with. I prefer wet exhaust because that's where my experience lies, and a dry stack boat ain't likely to be in my future. But you never know! --Milt Baker, Nordhavn 47 Bluewater, Fort Lauderdale Tim wrote: I take exception to John Marshall's comment re the "uninhabitability" of the cockpit on wet exhaust boats. I've owned six wet exhaust boats of various types. Those with the exhaust exiting the stern through a flat transom can suffer from the "station wagon" effect at higher speeds, resulting in exhaust fumes being sucked back into the cockpit. This can be unpleasant. On my last two boats, a Nordhavn 57 and 64, the exhaust exits at the aft starboard corner through an outlet that is underwater at about six knots. The exhaust is thus swept back behind the boat and does not come into the cockpit. There is no exhaust odor in the cockpit. The wet vs. dry debate is endless. For a thorough discussion of the issue, I suggest Dave Gerr's article in the February/March and April/ May 2008 issue of Professional Boat Builder: After weighing the plusses and minuses of each choice, Gerr concludes: "[M]y preference is for wet exhaust on yachts and most small passenger vessels. I think the majority of boat owners will be happier living with a wet exhaust."

Tks, Milt. Good advice from someone who has been there and done it. When I go back and think about it, my underway bad experiences are with boats with transom exhausts. The side-exhaust is apparently a much better approach. My only experience there is with my side-exhaust wing engine due to the wind angle, but that exhaust is well forward, just aft of the side boarding door. A main engine exhaust would not be that far forward. So thanks to several replies, I stand corrected. My negative experiences with wet exhaust don't reflect the way Nordhavn and possibly others build wet exhausts, and are more reflective of Bayliner-grade boats, which is where I got turned off to it. John Marshall On Feb 19, 2009, at 6:20 PM, Milt Baker wrote: > I find myself nearly always agreeing with John Marshall whose > reasoned, > intuitive approach to boatkeeping and whose literate, articulate posts > resonate very well with me. This time, however, I have to say I > think John > missed the boat. > > Like Tim, I've owned a half-dozen wet exhaust boats over several > decades and > have rarely had a problem with an inhabitable cockpit due to > exhaust. The only > time a problem arises, it seems, is when the wind is from abraft the > beam > (don't you love that phrase?!) at greater than the yacht's speed, > and on the > rare occasion when that occurs it's usually easy to alter course to > give the > cockpit party clear air. > > My Nordhavn 47 is the only one (so far!) with wet exhaust, and > there's no way > I'd trade it for a dry stack boat. The fine folks at PAE told me a > dry stack > boat was the way to go, but I persisted and ended up with a great > wet exhaust > boat and have not looked back. Over 18,000 miles in 4 years, > including an > ocean-crossing and a lot of putt-putting along various coasts in > Europe, the > Caribbean, the Bahamas, and the USA, I have yet to have a problem of > consequence from my wet exhaust system. If I were ordering a new > yacht of any > kind today there's no question that I'd spec wet exhaust. > > Tim's right: having the exhaust exit the boat on the quarter all but > eliminates exhaust problems in the cockpit. He's right again that > the wet vs. > dry debate goes on and on. There is no single right answer. I > admit it's > best to be less dogmatic than I am on the subject. > > Something I like very much about our cruising/yachting lifestyle is > that there > are no absolute answers on questions like this. There's every bit > as much > evidence supporting dry stack as wet exhaust, and it all comes down > to what > you prefer--or, perhaps more important, what you have experience > with. I > prefer wet exhaust because that's where my experience lies, and a > dry stack > boat ain't likely to be in my future. > > But you never know! > > --Milt Baker, Nordhavn 47 Bluewater, Fort Lauderdale > > Tim wrote: > > I take exception to John Marshall's comment re the "uninhabitability" > of the cockpit on wet exhaust boats. I've owned six wet exhaust boats > of various types. Those with the exhaust exiting the stern through a > flat transom can suffer from the "station wagon" effect at higher > speeds, resulting in exhaust fumes being sucked back into the > cockpit. This can be unpleasant. On my last two boats, a Nordhavn 57 > and 64, the exhaust exits at the aft starboard corner through an > outlet that is underwater at about six knots. The exhaust is thus > swept back behind the boat and does not come into the cockpit. There > is no exhaust odor in the cockpit. > > The wet vs. dry debate is endless. For a thorough discussion of the > issue, I suggest Dave Gerr's article in the February/March and April/ > May 2008 issue of Professional Boat Builder: After weighing the > plusses and minuses of each choice, Gerr concludes: "[M]y preference > is for wet exhaust on yachts and most small passenger vessels. I > think the majority of boat owners will be happier living with a wet > exhaust." > _______________________________________________ > http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/passagemaking-under-power > > To unsubscribe send email to > passagemaking-under-power-request@lists.samurai.com with the word > UNSUBSCRIBE and nothing else in the subject or body of the message. > > Passagemaking Under Power and PUP are trademarks of Water World > Productions, formerly known as Trawler World Productions.