Viking vs. Ocean

R

RPM-inc

Member
exMember
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
RO Number
15017
Messages
10
Can anybody tell me how a late 70's early 80's Viking 43 Double Cabin Motor Yacht and an early 80's Ocean 42 Sunliner compare? Of course assuming both boats are in the same condition and similar diesel power. To be used on Lake Michigan for short cruises and an occasional trip across the lake. I would be capable of most maintenance / repairs.

Thanks for any help.
 
I worked on a 43 viking back when the boat was new. great boat and nice layout... very solid ! I can't give ya any ocean feedback.

mark
 
Yacht Sales in my marina sold Ocean Yachts up till a couple years ago. They required a lot of work to get ready for delivery. Check out Soundings or yacht prices online. You can't deny a boat that is built better will fetch more money over time.
 
Viking is the better boat any year. 80's Ocean's weren't up to the standards of the mid 90's and 2000's Oceans. I would pass on the Sunliner.

Jonathan
 
Ocean's are built a little flimsy, (they have a reputation for coming apart in rough water) and can be had for a good price.
Viking's are built more like a Hatteras or Bertram, and priced accordingly.
You get what you pay for........
 
quote:
Originally posted by luckydave

Ocean's are built a little flimsy, (they have a reputation for coming apart in rough water) and can be had for a good price.
Viking's are built more like a Hatteras or Bertram, and priced accordingly.
You get what you pay for........

Click to expand...


I hope you are referring to the 80's Oceans which do have a bad reputation deservedly.

My '98 Ocean is solid, not like Bertrams or Hatts. The Viking IMHO isn't built like the Hatt or Bertram tanks, built very well but not the same in terms of solidness and weight.

Jonathan
 
To reduce problems the engines on those boats require as much investigation as the boats. Mostly they will be Detroits which delivered extraordinary longevity in original lower HP ratings but not high HP
 
Thanks for the info. It seems that the all the Sunliners had diesels but the Viking 43 DCMY could be had with either diesel or 454 crusaders. How would the gas engines be in the Viking? Like I said, it wouldn't be used as a long term cruiser. What kind of fuel economy could I expect with either option?
 
I've seen a Sunliner with twin 4 cylinder diesels advertised around 1 mpg running about 15 knots. Ones with the 6 cylinder diesels are a little more thirsty. Twin 454's in the Viking will probably get 0.5 to 0.6 mpg.
 
Make sure you check out and see if the fuel tanks are fiberglass or not. If fiberglass and gas engines you might have some big problems with the ethanol effecting the tanks.

With gas motors the boat would barely be able to get out of it's own way.

Jonahtan
 
I don't want to be rude and take over this thread with my own question, so I ask that whoever may have a response to this please start a new topic with your answer so we leave RPM-inc's thread intact.

So here's my question: Lucky Dave said a particular boat had a rep for coming apart in rough waters. Others made comments that also referred to a generally weak boat. I'm curious how much is folklore and old sailor talk, and how much is real. What does it actually mean "come apart"? Does the boat crack in half? Are there instances anyone can point to? For any boat? How rough a sea? Does the hull separate from the deck? Ever hear of a shady broker picking up a salvage like that and doing a duct tape fix to sell as a perfectly fine boat? Which boats might be weak - and if so in what way do they manifest this?

See I had a sail boat 'come apart' returning from Hawaii years ago. But it didn't literally come apart, just basically sank to the point of neutral buoyancy and that was that. So I'm curious if the expression is just generally phrasing, or are there regular instances people can point to of boats going to pieces. Thanks for letting me interject here!
 
Don't go for the gas powered Viking. It will be slow and very very thirsty. A friend's 35 weighed 21k and would cruise at 16kt burning over 30 gph.

I am partial to Viking and I think they compare well with Hatts and Berts. It will come down to your preference for layout. No matter, with boats this big and heavy, diesels are the only way to go.
 
Just remember when comparing these boats to compare the correct year ranges. How a boat is built now doesn't have much to do with how it was built 30 years ago, even if it's the same manufacturer. As Jonathan points out, the reputation of the early Oceans wasn't that great but if you talk to people with first hand knowledge of the later models they all seem very happy with them. In the same way I've had brokers tell me that while many consider Viking #1 now, that wasn't necessarily the case 20+ years ago. You need to get information from people (possibily brokers or surveyors) who have knowledge of those specific models and years, and not just those who will give general Viking vs Ocean opinions.
 
Thanks again everyone who replied. JohnC-There is a 7-8 year window in the boats I was asking about. If anyone wants to throw out comparable style boats in the >100k price range, that would be great! How does the Wellcraft San Remo compare??
 
JohnC-I understand exactly what you are talking about. I am hoping that brand loyalty won't sway an opinion. Thanks for the concern.
 
I base my comment about Ocean's coming apart mostly on my friend's experience with one he was using for six pac charter out of Hawaii.
It was an older boat, and the water is usually pretty rough there. He was constantly re tabbing bulkheads in place, fixing leaking windows, fixing struts that came loose, broken engine stringers, sprung hatches, etc. Structural problems galore.
BUT...like I said, it's pretty rough water there.
After the Ocean, he had a Bertram for 30,000 engine hours, and now has a Pacifica, with no problems in the same conditions.
Oceans (early ones at least) do seem to have a well deserved reputaion for poor quality, I have no knowledge about the newer ones, they may be fine for all I know.
 
BTW...the early Viking's reputations weren't all that great either, but they seem to be at the top of the game now.
 
I had a '79 40ft Ocean and never had a problem with it...J&T 6-71's..cruised an honest 22 knots [in calm seas]and burned very little fuel..I also was a pilot in Pearl harbor and I think she would have been fine out there.The problem with any boat getting busted up is "captains" or owners who insist on going out on days they should stay to the dock because they signed up for a tournament or some such,they beat the pizz out of the boat and then badmouth the brand.You can't run 20 kts into a 10' head sea and expect it to stay together.

Dick
 
I agree with Captdick, I had a 1980 42’ OY SF that gave me great service for the 10 years that I owned it. No structural issues, no “flexing”, great layout for its vintage, and very competitive with anything in its price range. Don’t get me wrong, from an engineering and workmanship standpoint it is not up to Bert or Hat – you usually get what you pay for. As for a 43 Viking DC vs. a 42 OY Sunliner the type of power and CONDITION should play a major part in your decision. As for Ocean Yachts holding up in the chartering business, 2 of Ocean City’s best charter boats are Muff Diver and Box Lunch, they have been winning tournaments for as long as I can remember. Good luck, Jerry
 
As someone else pointed out, that model Ocean yacht could be had with 4-71TI's, The only application of this motor in a production boat that I can remember. I can't imagine the boat was too fast in that configuration, it begs for the 6-71's.

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top