Sonaia suggested: In regards to WHAT George Buehler said: " You folks need to realize this whole SUBJECT is ridiculous. Ya know why? because there is NO SUCH THING as a PPM" THANK 'GOD' somebody with some common sense at last! It is an useless exercise trying to design a 'PPM' because one will NEVER get to agree to a design that will please all, a part of brushing their big egos talking about it endlessly and displaying 'SOME' knowledge about the subject. And as for you Jim Leishman, good on you that have given it up giving attention to all that long ago! One think that I said to Chris (my captain) when I started to read all this postings about the PPM, is that by the end of all this useless exercise, all those folks would end up appreciating their boats (Nordhavn, if that is the case) even more and understanding HOW HARD MUST IT BE to design a very good boat for a good price has the Nordhavns are, even tough they are not 'perfect'. Why don't you all get back talking about REAL issues that will really make a difference on our boating lives? Just a thought! Sonaia Hermida Goleen, NH5729 To which Scott suggests: a. In open discussion forums it's usually a case that if you don't want to participate in a discussion you simply ignore it and don't comment. I don't know how someone could get ego strokes by simply sharing their ideas, I guess this is more suggestive of alternative motivations for making postings to a list like this, but honestly I don't understand the comment? b. I do believe there is a PPM for each and every one of us, no one ever suggested it was the same boat for everyone. c. Building a production fiberglass boat in China and marketing/warranting it to the masses is not what this discussion is about. A fundamental premise is that it would likely be a one off exercise (almost a foregone conclusion this would drive the selection of steel or aluminum hull). PAE (Mr. Leishman) is engaged with building a company that makes a production boat based on relationships in China that have been cultivated over years and years. While he certainly has more experience in the marketplace building production boats he is not the end all source for all good things Passagemaking. While I admire what Mr. Leishman has accomplished, I am in awe of people like Alan Wagner who is taking his dream and working with US and Canadian craftsmen to create his boat from the keel up. While Mr. Leishman worries about making good on commitments for hulls coming from China with stock market shell shocked buyers in the US, some people here are wondering if there is another option? Can someone gather enough information and have their PPM built? Can it be built here, on US soil? A www.yachtworld.com search for steel hull, single engine, 40 to 60 feet, built after 2000, price below $800k yielded 80 results. The third result is a 47' Chuck Neville boat built in the US currently for sale for $600,000. Quick review of pictures leave me with a few questions, but it also inspires me to suggest the original premise was sound. Properly defined and built with an eye to budget, a custom built steel boat less than 50' capable of circumnavigation can be launched for less than $800k. Can it be done for less, what would that boat look like with roll tanks? Why hasn't PAE built a roll tank into any of its boats? What does George Buehler think of roll tanks? Had I had more time to plan our adventure, and knowing what I know now, I would seriously consider designing my own boat and having it built. For us time was an issue so an off the shelf boat was a great solution. If I do this again (after real retirement) it will be on a custom built boat. It will be steel, twin skegs/keels, roll tank, twin engine, Genset and Watermaker powered off mains, Paravanes and Active Fins, wet exhaust, low profile, mid master stateroom, guest bunks forward with head, integrated swimstep with weaver davits and weaver leaver for dinghy (dingy stored on deck during passage), low profile great room like Dashew FPB (as a matter of fact, a lot like a poor mans FPB), hands and knees engine room is fine in exchange for reduced boat height above water. Anyway, not sure why I felt like commenting other than to suggest the original idea wasn't a complete waste of time. I do think this might be better accomplished by a wiki page as that will insure contributions are peer reviewed and edits are controlled. Also it doesn't suffer from the emotional outbursts that so often detract from a discussion like this (outbursts I'm guilty of myself!!) Cheers, Scott E. Bulger, ALANUI, Nordhavn 40II, Seattle WA