Sam's is your source for Hatteras and Cabo Yacht parts.

Enter a part description OR part number to search the Hatteras/Cabo parts catalog:

Email Sam's or call 1-800-678-9230 to order parts.

Hatteras 45C vs Viking 45 (88-92)

S

Spanky's Gang

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
37
Status
  1. OTHER
Hatteras Model
Not Currently A Hatteras Owner
At the risk of starting a one-sided brush fire, I'd like to know what the forum would say in an honest comparison of the Series II 45C with a similarly "experienced" Viking 45. I've been dialed in on the Hatt because I'm sure it is superior in a heavy sea but the creature comforts and reduced fuel consumption of the Viking (Plan C-2SR/Dinette/1 Head) keep calling me (and my wife) back.

By the end of next season, I'm sure we will find a really good deal on a very clean 45. I know the market is in our favor, but expanding the possible options may improve our chances. Resale value is extremely important because this is an interim step before we buy a live-aboard in about 8-10 years.

This forum has to be the best collection of big boat experience out there. I invite and value your opinions.

Thanks in advance.

Spanky
 
The Viking 1988's & 9's were powered by 6-71 TIB's pumping out a whopping 485hp each. That's too much for a 426 cu" engine. Expect no more than 1000 hours between overhauls.

From 1990 on, Viking corrected their error and put in 6-92's @ 550 hp. 550 is the limit of where these engines should be rated. You can derate output to a preferred 500 hp by reducing prop pitch or injector size. (I would start with prop pitch)

The Viking "C" layout is one of the best interior designs I have ever seen on a mid size powerboat. I have not heard of stringer problems on these models. When on board a Viking, be sure to check the limber holes in the bilge. If they are not sealed with glass, check further to confirm there is no rot in that area. If you detect rot, walk away, you don't want to deal with the cost of that fix.

I'll defer to others on 45 Hatt concerns.
 
Last edited:
Viking uses plywood stringers and cored hulls. When looking at 20 year old boats, neither of these are very attractive features. If you decide to go with the Viking absolutely make sure that neither the stringers or hull have rot problems. Doing this will probably keep you looking for a while, but you do not want these problems.

Pete
 
I looked at some Viking's and there just isn't any comparision from a construction and engineering standpoint.

Brian
 
I like both boats a lot, i prefer the viking interior look but the finish in the Hat will be better. My opinion comes from experiences with my 86 48' Viking and big bills 46c and 58yf. I really do not like how Viking crammed the highest hp engines that they could find in the ER. (see the post by passages). I am sure you know this but check out access to the engine room, I like my access right by the door to the salon. All that being said, GET THE VIKING! I am gettin really lonely in here!
 
I have maintained and run 3 Viking 45C models 2 6v92 powered and 1 671 powered, also run numerous series II 45c Hatts.

Interior finish and layout the Vike wins hands down, and the 92 powered 45s were fast. 31 kts on the pins. However the ride in a chop sucks and they are extremely wet boats!!! You will have water on the bridge in a 1 ft chop.
While the 45 Hatt ER is tight the 45 Vike is worse.

The Hatt is a much better sea boat, but loses out in the interior and speed.
Everything is a tradeoff, it depends on what is more important for your intended use.


ps the 6v92 TA 550 hp forward plan engines are much better than the 6v92 TTA engines used in most of the 45 Hatts.
 
When I was in the market last year, I looked hard at the Viking 45 - in fact, my local broker, Bluewater, 6 or 7 listed. Most all were due for engine work but that was ok. What wasn't ok was the ride in moderate conditions - it was wet and hard. Also in my opinion the Viking in the off white which was common in the 80's looks dated. I think the Hatteras in the off white looks classic. The fit and finish of the Viking interiors is great but I didn't like the raised panels on the cabinets - looks more like as motorhome than a yacht - this isn't a knock on the quality just the style.

I love my Hatteras 45 - the icing on the cake is a pair of QSM11's - 26/31 - 35 gph/52gph. There are quite a few out there with new power. I'd search out one of those, it is a whole world of difference.
 
st tully, 26 knots at 35 gph? is that correct? If so what would be a guestamit for fuel consumption at 16 -18 knots? Another question is what hp rating are those qsm 11's.

Walt
 
Hey Walt - My QSM's are 535 hp and the cruise is @26 with a burn of @35. We have electronic controls with all the data and this season I will record the very precise numbers. The previous owner of many years had rebuilt the 692's once and when the time for another, he repowered - with the QSM 535 he gained 25% more economy and speed. I am a confirmed fan of the QSMs. Cheers.
 
st tully.....

Thanks for the info... When you can, would you let us know what the figures are for the speeds that most of our MY hulls were designed - about 16 -18 knots? Your figures are very impressive and I do recall about 5 years ago when I bought my 48 MY I was toying with the idea of replacing the 92's with QSM 11's but things got a little tricky because CW was that my hull design would not handle all the extra performance safely. If the day comes that my engines need to be re built, I probably would opt for a pair of new qsm's instead. (the lowest hp rating)

Walt
 
I would not have believed those numbers UNLESS I had been on a repowered 45C Series II with the full Cummins electronic instrumentation. Why? Because I burned 36-40gph all day long at 18kts with the 6V92s, and had both the fuel receipts over more than 1,000 operating hours and floscan data to prove it.

It really is that good with the Cummins; near as I can tell a significant part of the gain is from the fact that a HUGE amount of weight comes out of the boat when you repower with these engines. The engine efficiency gains are not small but when you combine both factors the net change is VERY impressive.

Its a much more "social" (quiet) boat with the Cummins in it too.

Its a totally different boat.

I'd put a repowered Series II 45C with the Cummins engines and a redone interior up against ANY of the so-called "modern" sportfish of the same size. You'd have about half the total investment in vis-a-vis a "new" boat (we're talking total refit here, not just power) but IMHO there's simply no comparison in terms of what you actually get. I'd rather own the Hatteras any day of the week, never mind the insane monetary advantage.
 
If you go after the Viking be sure to check the transom near the scuppers as they leak and get rot there also. Overall I'd take the Hatt over the Vike but there are some sweeter deals to be had on Vikings ...........Pat
 
Spanky,
Happy holidays! My take (based on critieria that I would value) Sea Keeping/Ride - Hatt big plus, Speed, Hatt - Minus, Interior - Hatt Minus, overall construction/integrity for a 20 yr old boat - Hatt plus, Lines and Classic Look (rather than dated look) - Hatt plus, Engineering and Systems - Hatt - plus, Resale (in the future) - Hatt marginal plus. I would favor the Hatt.

My 2cts.

Best,

TG
 
Thanks for all the input guys. Much to consider. I'd have to say I like the possibility of finding a Hatt that's been repowered or a steal I can afford to throw more money at.

Anybody have some real numbers on what a Cummins repower might run?
 
North of $100k. I had it quoted at one point and it came in around $130. Engine+Gear were in the $40ish range each, if I remember correctly.
 
My QSM 11's were installed in 2002 at Dog River Marine and it came in at more than $100k - I'd think now it would be at least $150. I know that Town Creek Marina in Beaufort, NC has done similar repowers - you might give them a ring.
 
August of 07 engine and gears for my QSM 705 hp were 61.5K each delivered. Add at least another 60-65K for removal/install.
 
Thank you for providing some numbers to think about. Seems I'd end up spending $200K by the time the can of worms gets closed up.

I've been searching around and have found quite a few 45s (and have expanded the search to 46s based on a discussion with a member of the forum) that have been repowered, mostly Cat C9s or Cummins. (I'll stick with Cummins or Cats and steer clear of the MANs.)

We'll take a ride on a few this Spring. (Hey the days are getting longer already!!)
 
Genesis said:
I would not have believed those numbers UNLESS I had been on a repowered 45C Series II with the full Cummins electronic instrumentation. Why? Because I burned 36-40gph all day long at 18kts with the 6V92s, and had both the fuel receipts over more than 1,000 operating hours and floscan data to prove it.

It really is that good with the Cummins; near as I can tell a significant part of the gain is from the fact that a HUGE amount of weight comes out of the boat when you repower with these engines. The engine efficiency gains are not small but when you combine both factors the net change is VERY impressive.

Its a much more "social" (quiet) boat with the Cummins in it too.

Its a totally different boat.

I'd put a repowered Series II 45C with the Cummins engines and a redone interior up against ANY of the so-called "modern" sportfish of the same size. You'd have about half the total investment in vis-a-vis a "new" boat (we're talking total refit here, not just power) but IMHO there's simply no comparison in terms of what you actually get. I'd rather own the Hatteras any day of the week, never mind the insane monetary advantage.
Click to expand...

The electronic controlled 4-cycle engines are far more fuel efficient than any mechanical or electronic 2-cycle engine. As good as Detroit's N-injector is, comparing it to an electronic controlled fuel system is like comparing a razorblade to a laser.

Cummins electronic 8.3's at close 480 to 500hp would be my only choice to repower BUSTER with,if I can ever wear out my old Cummins engines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
38,136
Messages
448,532
Members
12,481
Latest member
mrich1

Latest Posts

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom