Viking vs. Post vs. Bertram?

AMG,
Let me give you my take. And by the way, I am partial to Vikings, which I feel are excellent vessels, but also notable by their lines and looks.

These three brands are all very fine sportfish builders. Onthe surface, they are clean, fishable and confortable as cruisers with family/friends. So you need to go below the surface and do some detailed investigation. With th eengines, check for usage, hours, signs of problems (i.e. leaks, hotspots, rust, etc) but also look at service inervals. Vessles from 1995 may have well over 1000 hours depending on usage. MAN's standards require a major service at 1000 hours, nit sure of the Detriots. But Detroits historically run a bit dirtier, making for messy engine rooms (do you have Detroits on that Tiara?). Look at access to pumps, bilges, AC units, wire runs, etc. Since you are going with a vesel that is 10+ years old, some systems may need attention as they age. What are you using the boat for, fishing, cruising or both? Plan on living on it? Do the different capacities (i.e water, holding tank, fuel) make a difference?
Posts typically have less draft, which you may want of doing coastal cruising. But I have seen Vikings and Bertrams wallow a bit in big seas, so I think it really depends on the oceans you will be cruising.
If you plan on doing your own engine maintenance, then access to and around engines and generators is paramount. Most of the vessels mentioned should have cockpit access, which I feel is best (not tracking dirt through the salon).
May not have answered the question directly, but at least a few thoughts.
Good luck.

AMGinFL,

If you search the sportfish forums, you should find a few threads with some wisdom. Specifically, look for posts by Loren Schweizer. He's been onboard, fished or sold just about everything with a tower. Also, look for posts by CTDave. He's is a previous 46' Post owner and currently has a 50' Bertram. Oh, and YF member "Viking 58" will certainly be able to give you some ownership insight.

Guys... where are you???

Hey, Carl, thanks for the kind words!

To AMGinfl: CaptTom offers a lot for you to chew on in this thread. Heed his advice!

My own advice to you is to find a good broker and just go look at some of these boats before you do too much of a "paper search". You might find, say, an engine room that is untolerably tight for you on a particular boat... galleys with something that doesn't exactly excite your wife ( I'd advise that you inspect these boats together)...hanging lockers that are too small, and so on.

Ask your broker person to point out all the warts; the Tiara you're moving up from has excellent fit & finish while the boats you are considering generally have a higher degree of engineering.

Along the way, you will find yourself/yourselves falling in love with a particular make/model because it managed to hit a "hot button" or two, or perhaps for a purely emotional reason.

"Viking - Bertram - Post"---- no Hatteras', eh?

While you didn't mention wanting to go to Bimini on a snotty day, or if you desire to hang out all morning with a kite up waiting for a sail off Carysfort, or if you just want this type of boat for " the look", yes, they do handle differently from each other, so they're driven differenly, e.g., you'd add more tabs on the Post going into a headsea and let that deeper forefoot work for you; they added more deadrise in the mid-nineties compared to the Dick Tracy- chin transom of the earlier boats.
Bertram made their reputation on their ability to go fast in a seaway and Viking eventually arrived there as well. The differences are subtle. Now, add a hardtop or tower and the equation just changed.

Engines: every manufacturer has a boo-boo ( some have BOO-BOOS) in their collective pasts. They fixed 'em. Your job is to get good advice on the engine service life, who did the rebuilds, and is there documentation for all that.
The rest is all Ford-Chevy talk.

Keep in mind that boats are built by people, some on Wednesdays, some on Fridays, and that they are built with Stuff. Stuff Breaks. Stuff gets Fixed.

Your marine surveyor (and engine surveyor)-- and don't cheap out here, get a highly regarded one--will be able to tell you if you're looking at a dog or a gem and whether or not this fine vessel was run hard and put away wet.

The boat-choosing process is usually entertaining and you will learn a heckuva lot as you proceed.

AMG,
If you find a sweet deal on a 50 Hatt, and you really like it, you may want to take it. Your concern about handling will quickly dissipate once you get used to the boat. It sounds like you'll do most of your cruising with at least one other person which is good. A little planning when either leaving or approaching a dock will save a lot of grief, and with two people, you stay at the helm and the other person can get on just two lines to make the boat stay where it is. And a 50 is usually heavy and will sit for a few more seconds than perhaps your Tiara did, giving you more time to secure lines. If it has a bow thruster, all the better. Then you can put that vessel anywhere you want to. I used to run a 61 footer (Sunseeker), and take it out and dock again all alone. It's all in your planning. If you want some help when you get your new boat, drop a line.
Good luck.
Capt Tom

There's no doubt in my mind that Viking is the best all around choice of the three. Fit and finish, engine room layout, accommodations and resale value.
Some of the Bertrams had issues in the mid 90's, especially in that 46' size. Post, though of decent quality, has always had a down sea issue because of her flat bottom aft.
Though the Viking may be a little wet and hard in a head sea, she's still a good performer and rides fairly well if you pull those throttles back

I think the Bertram 46.6 is a hell of a boat with great sea keeping abilities that may even surpass boats that are much larger. The Viking 46 is a boat that I remember from my childhood in the 80's. It has about the same specs as the Bertram 46.6, but I think the Viking 46 layout is much nicer. It makes much better use of available space, though it probably doesn't 'cut' into the waves like the Bertram 46.6. Both 46's are tough, heavy, well built boats. The only downside to boats of this vintage and size is their reliance on a salon entry to the engine room.

I know nothing about Posts other than they are horrible sea boats, and they didn't correct this problem until the early 2000's. The bottom of a Post hull reminds me of a Carolina Skiff.

I too wouldn't worry about the difference in handling a 45' or 55'. The 55' is actually easier to handle because wind effects it less. I would look at a 2001ish 50' Viking sf. I ran a 2001 with 1050hp MAN's and it ran like a raped ape, with a 36-37knot cruise, handled well, had a great layout inside and a great cockpit layout and was an all-around great boat. I would also look at a 48' Cabo if funds allow. I ran a 2004 50' Hatteras and was not impressed with it. It pounded a lot with full fuel, once you drained the 200 gallon bow tank it started riding pretty decent. The 46' Bertram is a good hull but has a tendancy to rock quite a bit, and quality can vary from year to year.....

I would not even consider a post, unless you like watching the rub rail touch the water in rough seas. They're a scary ride.

Btw. As a professional Captain, I wouldn't single handle anything over maybe a 40' express and not even that if I am going in the ocean, definately not a 70'. Anything could happen from falling overboard, to a fire, to a mechanical breakdown, and with just yourself you cannot prevent or fix anything underway. It's just not a wise thing to do from a safety standpoint. A friend of mine was bringing back a 53' Hatteras SF from Nassau to Ft. Laud and slipped down the bridge ladder....... needless to say he had to hobble up to the flybridge in rough seas and run the boat back to ft. laud in terrible pain with a broken leg........

I would take Bertram out of the equation. The old 46 (80's) was a battle wagon. They've changed. I used to captain a 2002 51' and we got put into port in a 5' head sea. We ran with a 2004 46. It's narrower, lighter and faster than the old ones, but only good in 3 to 4'. BTW, how'd you get those speeds out of a 50 Viking with 1050's. "ran a 2001 with 1050hp MAN's and it ran like a raped ape, with a 36-37knot cruise" The 51 Bertram with 1050 topped @ 27 kts and cruised at 23. At cruise we burned about 80gph.

You guys are crazy to do that by yourselves. Don't you have any friends or someone who can at least meet you at the dock???

Our SF has a 5' draft and in 2005 we took the ICW all the way up to Miami via the bay from Marathon YC. If Google Earth would have been mapping its globe over the keys that day, there would have been a brown stripe about 20 miles long left behind by our boat!

So I am not the only one who knows about a rough ride on a Post? I thought I was gonna DIE on a 46' post...

I ran a 57' Bertram SF 2005, it rode horribly also. In 3-5' seas it would get a 5 gallon bucket of saltwater on the bridge strataglass twice an hour. In 5' seas every 5 minutes the strataglass would be covered, it didn't matter if it was a following sea. In the first 6 months, all of the bulkhead to stringer tabbing was breaking loose and it sat at the factory for 3 months getting repaired because the whole boat was coming un-glued. It was fast, 31 knot cruise with only 1300hp mans and had a great range, but didn't ride good.

Look on Yachtworld, they built only 12 Viking's in that era '99-2002 that had 1050hp MAN's, some have a posted cruising speed of 32knots, 39 knots tops on yachtworld....... This particular boat had a product called sea-slide put on over the bottom paint, the boat picked up 3 knots with that stuff and did so for a year. He also had the props tuned by some place, I forget the name of the place, and that netted another 1-2 knots........I have seen a lot of yachts that are 7-10 years old that if you soda blast all of the old bottom paint off and start with a fresh coat pick up 2 knots. I dont know if it's a weight issue, if you figure all of the cans of bottom paint layered on there or just the roughness.

Yeah, the 46' will almost throw you off of the flybridge.

The newer ones aren't any better. I was on a 2005 50' Post and it rode flat and stable, but pounded pretty good and was a wet sob. I'd rather be on an Ocean then a Post anyday if that's saying anything.

A 57' bertram rode horrible? Was is just a wet boat or did it take to the seas poorly?

Could spray rails take away the splash?

BOTH. Bertram basically stretched the 54' Mold and screwed it up. The old 54's had the fuel tanks in the cockpit and center of engine room, on the 57' They thought it was a good idea to put 1- 1700 gallon tank as the foward engine room bulkhead. It rode completely flat and then it would ride over so many waves and then just nose dive into one...... It also pounded. They had too much weight foward, that was the problem...... when you were down to 500 gallons it started running really nice as the bow lifted, but..... who runs around with only 500 gallons on board.......Also the 300 gallon holding tank was in the very bow....... so if that had anything in it......or was full, it was even worse.....

I have never been in a 54' Bertram, only a 46'. What is it like ridin' in a 54'??? Is it as amazing as everyone says? I have to admit, the 54 looks like an ugly duckling, but it is legendary...

I ran one 54' Bertram SF that was a 1984 with a hardtop about 5 years ago. It had the origional wore out 12v71's with 4700 hours on them, never been rebuilt. In 4' seas it got up and ran 30 knots at cruise and had a nice smooth dry ride. Each builder has 1 great hull in their line up, Bertram's was the 54'. It did rock and roll at trolling speeds, but not horribly, just a bit more then a viking or hatteras. Each builder has a niche that their hull is designed for. A 52' Hatteras or newer 54' hatteras will plow right through 6 footers on the nose without feeling it, but on the beam they roll. Vikings are the most stable at cruising speed and running, but you've got to really start bringing it back in a head sea.

What do you think about the 60' Bertram compared to the 54'? Is it better? Or did they make the same mistake they made with the new 57'?

60' Bertram - handsome boat

http://newimages.**************/1/6/2/9/2/1629294_1.jpg?1221278588000

VS.

54' Bertram -

http://newimages.**************/1/9/9/3/6/1993628_1.jpg?1225138663000