In recent months I couldn't understand
why we were getting so many e-mails asking about this boat. I
had thought we had a review posted up here, and I know that
I wrote one. Well, looks like the dang computer ate it. My prediction
about very large hard drives is coming true; you get so much stuff
on them that you can't finding anything and it got lost. Well,
maybe its for the best because in the last couple months we've
done two more 46 convertibles and one 46 motor yacht, and what
I had previously written about the speed of this boat was not
quite right.

|

|
| The hallmark of good design: Twenty
years later it still looks good. No passe trend of the minute
here. |
|
Since speed is the number one question asked,
here's what we got out of the latest sea trails of a 1979 and
'82 Convertible with the aging 8V71TI's, (the '79 boat engines were
reportedly rebuilt in 1996), and rated at 435 hp, back in
the days when Detroit Diesel used pretty conservative power ratings.
The '79 boat had mismatched propellers, one being cupped, the other
not, one was bent, the other not, and we pulled a consistent 23.6
knots upwind into a good 18 knot breeze. Engine RPM's were 2150
and 2275 WOT. It will stay on step at 16.5 knots at 1800 RPM. This
boat had no tower, only a Bimini top with enclosures, no chair and
was lightly loaded with less than half fuel and water. Keep in mind
the engines on this boat were not turning up to full rated RPM of
2350. Neither were souped up with oversize injectors.
The '81 had a half tower, chair and more equipment,
and the speeds were roughly 1 knot less across the board under similar
conditions. Most likely, my memory of the 46C being an 18-20
knotter was based on full tower boats with all that extra drag.
We didn't have much wind in the tower to slow it down that much,
but rest assured that it does. In any case, that's not too
far off, and I found in the tattered old Bertram manual the speed
and fuel table as supplied by Bertram for the"Bertram Yacht"
which I take to mean the MY and not the convertible. Bear in mind
that the MY is a heavier boat. It is reproduced below.
You can whack a good two knots off those numbers
for any boat with a tower. You'll note that there is a disproportionate
leap in speed between 1800 and 2375 RPM. This is very typical of
the deep vee hull that is much less efficient at lower speeds. This
is also the reason why people tend to run the engines faster, since
the most efficient speed is very close to top speed. This, in my
view, makes the boat underpowered. You want to run them no more
than 2100, at which point you're barely doing 20 knots. For maximum
life, 2000 RPM is better. (The faster a deep vee goes, the more
the hull rises out of the water, resulting in less drag and the
big jump in speed toward the top end.)
We've been asked many times what would be a good
repower choice, and have replied that the 6V92 at 500 hp would be
a good choice. It is virtually the same cubic inch displacement,
but is a considerably stronger engine that will cruise this boat
comfortably at 22 kn. at 2000 RPM. This more compact engine
also frees up a lot of engine room space, making maintenance easier.
I don't favor any of the inline 6's because the power comes too
high on the torque curve. The vee engine handles the high speed
loads much better. However, all bets are off for 6V92 engine souped
up to 535 or 550 hp; I guarantee you they will not last.

|

|
| A true deep vee hull, one
look from this aspect and you know why this is a superior
rough water boat. |
Proof of the theory: knocking
down a 3' tide rip in the Gulfstream outside Port Everglades
inlet at WOT, leaving the wake far behind. |
Heading out Port Everglades we had a nice 3 foot
sea (I don't overestimate wave height. Most folks would call these
four footers) from the southeast meeting an outgoing tide putting
the waves into straight up and down mode. As you would expect, the
Berty just chopped right through them, albeit with plumes of spray
cascading over us; this is a very wet boat. Both in the tide rip
of the inlet and beyond into rolling three footers stretched out
by trade winds blowing with the Stream, there was no pounding or
suddering. Right away you know you are on a very heavy boat by the
nice, easy motion. In meeting a wave, the bow does not rise too
quickly to throw you off your feet, which is where all that spray
comes from. That deep vee parts the waters like Moses crossing the
Red Sea. In a beam sea, she rolls more than a shallower vee with
large chine flats, at which point you gotta do some serious hanging-on.
But she meets her strength again in a following sea at speed, where
the fairly full bow reveals no tendency to submarine, and little
tendency toward broaching, but you do have to work to keep her on
course. The autopilot is useless on this point and will only work
itself to death.
Heading into a quartering sea with the full bow
is the real weakness, as she pitches and yaws severely, at
which point you need to do some tacking to get where you want to
go. Then, again, only a much finer entry bow such as a Buddy Davis
or a newer Viking SF can handle this point of attack very well.
A Hatteras will do a bit better because of its finer entry, but
not all that much. Once we got out of the tide rip, we could carry
full speed into the stretched-out three footers, but it was not
a pleasant ride, nor would it be in any boat. When you hear guys
talk about going full bore into four footers comfortably, time to
get out the salt shaker; they stretch the truth a bit.

|
| Although the deep vee maintains the
same deadrise angle throughout the length, the fullness of
the bow and a very narrow chine flat makes her a wet boat. |
The motor yacht we recently surveyed, a 1976 model,
was a north eastern boat that was beautifully maintained. Believe
it or not, the original gel coat was polished and still had a beautiful
shine on; its no secret that Bertram used a top quality gel coat
from Cook Chemical which proves that with some care, the finish
can last indefinitely if the builder will use a quality material.
I was so surprised that I had to do a double take to make sure that
it hadn't been painted. The two 46C's were dull, but the finish
wasn't chalky or porous and would could be restored with a good
compounding. The 46C and the 46 My are the same identical hulls
with just about everything the same except the addition of the aft
cabin. But the MY is heavier, squats more because of more weight
aft, and weights about a ton more, and therefore is slower.
Basically, these boats are everything we've said
they are in other reviews. They are well engineered, and at 1000
lbs/ft. they are heavy boats, but they do not have the tremendously
thick laminates that many people think they do. One guy told us
his 31 is 1-1/2" thick on the bottom! I can assure you that
Lee Dana, the chief designer at Bertram, was not interested in building
tanks. I have seen three wrecked 46's lately, everything from hurricane
damage to having their bottoms torn out on reefs. The hull average
only about a 1/4" -3/16" on the sides and 1/2 to 5/8"
inch on the bottom, which is not heavy by anyone's standard. What
makes them different is that Bertrams are properly framed, unlike
so many others where the objective seems to be to use as little
framing as possible. Most of the weight in this boat comes from
the tons of plywood used on the interiors.
In keeping with that, we found serious stress cracks
around the port strut base, which has a 1.5" x 8" wood
doublers laminated into the bottom. Over the years, water has probably
gotten at the wood and we suspect that the wood has deteriorated.
There was quite a bit of vibration and flexing of the bottom panels
running at speed, suggesting that the doubler has been seriously
weakened. This is just one of the many things you have to deal with
when buying an old boat. This may have been the result of prior
damage, but in any case, a major repair was needed.

|
| Something you may not expect to see
on a Bertram, but there it is: stress cracks around the strut.
This is probably the result of a molded-in wood doubler that
got water in it and deteriorated, causing the bottom to weaken.
Cracks were found on the interior also. Not the armored tanks
that many people think they are. This condition may be the
result of prior damage. |
The '79 model had the fiberglass cockpit deck which
was in fine shape, but the mica on plywood tackle centers and side
liners which were badly rotted. There is no core in the hull at
all, but the decks have both balsa coring and plywood around the
winch and cleat bases. Someone had drilled lots of holes in the
bridge deck and water had gotten in and raised up some really big
blisters in places. And speaking of blisters, the bottom was loaded
with big ones, running anywhere from 1" to 4". It
was no secret that Bertram tank coated their hulls, the technique
of using a high quality resin on the outside, and lower quality
stuff everywhere else. Sometimes the layup crews make mistakes and
use the wrong stuff in the wrong place, which is probably what happened
here. Or maybe it was laid up on Monday after a holiday week end.
Who knows? Asking why a boat has blisters is like solving the riddle
of the Sphinx.
Another weakness is the awful stainless over aluminum
rub rail that was a corroded mess. The problem here is that
most of the bolts on the back side can't be reached without tearing
the boat apart; otherwise one could just replace the rails. This
problem really hurts this boat because the rail becomes so
ugly and there is basically nothing you can do about it. At least
at reasonable cost. One of our boats had spent most of its life
in the islands, where there is little fresh water and they don't
get washed down often, which partly explains why the aluminum rails
looked so bad on this one. Yet many others don't look so good either.
The overall exterior looked fairly good, but the maintenance below
decks was terrible.
The engine room vents are poorly designed and they
pull a ton of salt spray into the engine room, a factor which I
attribute to why the 8V71's in this boat have a faired poor
track record. One look in the E.R. and the effects of the salt spray
are immediately obvious. The aft bulkhead is nearly water tight,
so the engines are only pulling air in through the side vents. One
option to solve the problem would be to redirect the air intakes
from under the cockpit and close off the side vents. Or you
could build dorades into the hull sides and add fiberglass filters.
Another is to add Walker AirSeps, but that won't solve the engine
room corrosion problem. In any case, unless you do something, your
engines are going to be sucking salt.
| In recent weeks we've
polled three full-time engine surveyors on the subject of
the service life of the 8V71TI engine. Frankly, I was surprised
to get three quite different opinions: great, ho-hum and terrible.
Only one of the three mentioned the fact that when you attempt
to pull too much power out of them, you are greatly reducing
service life. Actually, this is a well-proven engine, and
435 is not too much power to squeeze from this block, but
it is close to the edge, and it does have some notable
problems with the turbo/intercooling system. In addition,
failure to maintain the airbox drain/respiration system can
shorten engine life drastically. With good maintenance they
perform reasonably well as long as you don't push them too
hard. Good maintenance service life generally runs 2000 -
2500 hours depending on how many years those hours were accumulated.
Sucking up salt spray is one reason why engine hour
meters often don't mean anything. The Allison M20 gear boxes
to which they are usually mated, originally designed for 165
hp, are known for bearing failures. |
There were only light stress cracks that were not
very obvious appearing on the toe rails in a few spots. The windows
and frames were in good condition although there were a few corrosion
holes in the slide channels from years worth of accumulated salt.
The frames are painted so they can easily be pulled and the holes
welded, and then repainted. And since the hull is glassed to the
deck, there were little or no interior leaks and thus no water damage.
Even the custom made (not residential grade), aluminum framed sliding
salon doors still worked well.
The electrical systems were in surprisingly good
shape and hadn't been all buggered up with jury-rig alterations
and repairs. This model has a separate 32 volt battery compartment
under the cockpit deck that is very easy to get to. But it
also has the generator under the cockpit deck as well. The hatch
cover is very large, affording good maintenance access, but the
hatch gutters are very shallow so that if you blast the deck with
a hose, you know where some of that water will be going. This one
had a two year old Onan 12.5 kw unit in the 4 door sound shield.
Apparently Onan has now abandoned those god-awful 3600 RPM
Japanese diesel they were using for a while. This was a 1800 RPM
engine that was very quite, but you can't say the same for the 3600
RPM jobs that scream like a banshee. The trademark Onan crapola
soleniod switches are still there and, of course, they crapped out.
We had to wire them open to make the engine run.
The Bertram 46C was built for 18 years and there
are a lot of them around, worldwide. Because they are Bertrams,
most have been used like Bertrams, meaning they've had a hard life.
Some of them are pretty clapped out, but there are a lot of major
refits floating around too. These boats make exceptionally good
refit projects because they have a timeless styling that maintains
their good looks and desirability. One of our survey models was
selling well under $150k but I wouldn't necessarily say that it
was a real bargain.
What you will find on many of these boats are the
exhaust systems, plumbing, appliances, pumps and motors, and sometimes
the electrical systems, have been jury-rigged and bastardized to
the point of no return because of folks who don't want to pay the
cost of doing things right. Thus the burden of correcting all these
problems is going to fall on you.
Don't make the mistake of thinking you can
pick one of these boats up for around $150-175k and have a nice
boat that's ready to go. Most of them need a cash infusion
of at least $50k or more to rectify decades worth of deferred maintenance.
If you have to do engines and generators, its going to be a lot
more. If you expect to find one with all the machinery in top shape,
you are dreaming. Really. The engines are usually the last
thing anyone spends money on. Then figure that most of the systems
will need replacement, not merely repair. One of our survey
boats could gobble up $100k in a heart beat, and the other one already
had.
Remember that you're looking at a boat with a Replacement
Cost of over $700k and there's no way you're going to get off that
cheap. Don't put yourself in the hole by wishful thinking. Part
of what you save over the cost of a newer boat has to be put back
into an older one. Otherwise, all you'll end up with
is a clapped out old boat that is going to bleed you bankrupt anyway.
And when you try to unload it to release the burden, you'll be facing
a fire sale. This is one of the reasons why older boats end up going
down hill fast. People make the mistake of thinking the purchase
price is the cost of ownership. If you want to be conservative about
it and not shoot youself in the foot, add at least 50% onto the
purchase price as the cost of getting it back in shape. Even so,
you're still looking at less than half the cost of a new one.
I give the 46C a four-star rating, which is one
less than I gave the 45-46 Hatteras Convertible. All that wood in
the cockpit, a less than great interior and the shoe-box engine
room are significant negatives. Yes, it outperforms the Hatteras
in rough water, and it is certainly a better looking boat, but the
difficulty in maintaining this boat has to be a consideration for
the budget minded.
| These are
"reviews", not surveys, and bear no resemblance to our survey
reports. We do not publish
the results of the surveys that we perform. Please note that the purpose
of these reviews is educational, to help you discern the differences in
quality among boats generally. They are not offered as a means to help
you evaluate any particular boat builder. We have no other reviews than
those posted. |
|