Twin or Single?

By Douglas Gould, MTOA #2606

In this article, I want to address a topic that many trawler owners are quite
passionate about: twin screw verses single screw. I know that this subject has been
hashed over many times in the past, but the question of ‘how many engines’ is one that is
asked, and perhaps even agonized over by many owners and those contemplating the
purchase of their first powerboat, and perhaps MTOA members contemplating moving on
to their next trawler. It is a subject that is passionately argued about over cold drinks. My
aim is not to convince you to chose one over the other, but to stimulate your thought
process and challenge your biases so that you approach the debate with an open mind.
Before I begin, some disclosure is in order, so that what biases I have come to the reader
with some context for the origin of my opinions.
I have been driving boats all my life, both for fun and profit. I hold a Master’s
License (100T, Near Coastal, Assistance Towing and Sail endorsement). I have owned
sailboats and powerboats, and have lived aboard both for over fifteen years. My current
boat is a 1978 Marine Trader 40’ Sedan, the Water Torture. She is a single screw vessel.
As a professional captain, I have been lucky enough to be at the wheel of a large variety
of vessels, from fifteen-foot outboard marine patrol boats, to a one hundred twenty-foot,
four engine, four-screw torpedo retriever (yes, that’s four screws). In between, there has
been triple screw crew boats, twin screw passenger ferries, single screw sailboats, twin
outdrive catamarans, both single and twin jet drive boats, single inboard towboats,
and….well, you get the idea. I believe I’m qualified to argue the merits and drawbacks of
practically every kind of small vessel propulsion system.
The debates around twin vs single usually digress into few general categories –
the “Get Home factor” which refers to one’s ability to reach a safe port or repair facility
after some major mechanical malfunction; the advantages and disadvantages about
maneuvering; and the costs of owning two engines verses the savings of owning just one,
and the extra time needed to maintain two engines.
All of my arguments herein are made with a direct comparison in mind; i.e. apples
to apples. Its not fair, nor very informative, to compare a 53’ twin-screw Krogan Express
to a 50’ single-screw Diesel Duck. I’m more interested to explore whether it is worth
having two engines in the Duck. So, as you read on, keep in mind that my arguments are
made based on the assumption that we are comparing the merits of one engine verses two
in if not identical, then very similar hulls. The Water Torture was available as either as
twin or single, and most 40’ Marine Traders came in the twin configuration. Many of the
used trawlers on the market today are available either way, and if you are considering
buying one, then you’ve come to the right article.

The Get Home Factor

The most obvious argument that falls in favor of the twin-screw is that a second
engine increases the chance that you can get home, or at least into safe harbor, in the
event of a catastrophic failure in one of the two drive trains. There is nothing I could say
to dispute that argument. Nor should the fact that one has a redundant propulsion system
at one’s disposal be discounted. But how much one needs such a thing depends on where
and how your boat is used. Are you crossing large, open bodies of water where engine
failure can leave you at the mercy of the elements? Furthermore, one doesn’t need a twin-
screw boat to achieve a redundancy of propulsion. There are “get home” systems
available that are intended as a back-up source of power and/or propulsion, thus getting
you home.
Except for some of the new, large trawlers being built for the luxury market, most
get home systems are set up to provide an alternative way to turn the same shaft and
propeller that the main engine would on a single screw boat. Lets call that a “single shaft
get home system”. Consider for a minute which problems that kind of system solves, and
which problems are left unsolved. Complete main engine failure, like crankshaft, blown
head gasket, ruptured injector line, busted injection pump, cooling and lubrication
systems, and transmission failure - all of those problems would be solved by a single
shaft get home system. Now, make a list of the problems it would not solve: broken prop
shaft, severely bent or broken prop blade, prop hopelessly fouled with net or line, seized
cutlass bearing, bent rudder. In none of those cases will a single shaft get home system
get you home. You may have noticed that I didn’t mention the elephant in the engine
room: bad fuel. Bad fuel may or may not affect a single shaft get home system,
depending on what the actual problem is. If the fuel problem is outside the fuel tank, then
it can be solved regardless of whether you have a get home or not. If the fuel problem is
inside the tank, then the get home motor will most likely suffer the same ailment, and
therefore hasn’t solved any problems.
As I mentioned, there are get home systems that include their own dedicated shaft
and propeller, but the costs and space involved means that they are impractical for
consideration on smaller, recreational vessels. If you are going to have two engines, two
shafts, two stuffing boxes and two props, you are pretty much building a twin screw boat
anyway, with the costs of stringers, alignment, couplings, bonding and maintenance that a
real twin screw boat would have. The economics of these types of get home systems
don’t really make sense until you are up in the 65’ boat length or over.
Now consider the advantages of a traditional twin-screw with a complete,
redundant drive train, each capable of pushing your boat independently of the other; two
engines, two transmissions, two couplings, two shafts and props, and usually two or more
fuel tanks. There is no doubt that that the twin-screw owner has increased his chances of
getting back to port should some failure occur, but the benefit of all that hardware needs
to be weighed against all the costs.
When I purchased Water Torture, she came equipped with a single shaft get home
system, which consisted of a noisy single cylinder diesel engine that could drive a small
AC generator and/or a large hydraulic pump (Water Torture is also equipped with a 5kw
genset, so the AC generator was a backup generator, I guess. I never used it). The
hydraulic pump had four huge, messy, oily hoses that ran about three feet over to an
hydraulic motor that was mounted directly above the main prop shaft. Attached to the
motor was a small triple groove vee-belt pulley, and attached to the prop shaft was
another, larger triple groove pulley. In theory, one could rig three vee-belts around the
two pulleys, and this whole system (originally marketed as the “Trawler Hauler”) would
create enough hydraulic power to turn the prop and get you home, or to a port of repair. It
cost me four bloody knuckles, one can of liquid wrench and three days of work to remove
the entire mess. I gave it away.
The list of junk that came out of my bilge includes an 18hp Farrymann Diesel
with a 2kw AC genset; 4 gallons of hydraulic fluid; a starting battery; a 40 pound
hydraulic motor; fuel lines and small racor filter; a trickle charger for the starting battery;
a through hull fitting with sea cock and sea strainer; a wet exhaust muffler, miscellaneous
brackets, hoses, pulleys, wire looms, etc. I estimate that together it all weighed about 800
pounds. I replaced all that with a small, one ounce piece of paper: my Boat/US towing
membership card.
The point is that I do all my cruising in coastal waters, almost exclusively within
the ICW. Someday, I might cross the sixty miles from Florida to the Abacos, but that is
as far as I ever intend to go in the Water Torture. I can’t imagine a time when I’ll need a
get home engine, and I certainly have put the space it took up to much better use storing
tools and spares that I need to keep the main engine running, thereby reducing the need
for a get home even further. Another thing to consider about a get home engine is that
you are counting on it to be your emergency, reserve power supply, and if you are not
fanatical about maintaining it, it won’t work when you need it most and you’re better off
not having it to begin with. If you are like me, and confine your voyages to heavily
traveled coastal routes where assistance is readily available, I wouldn’t waste my time
with a single shaft get home system, and I don’t think a twin-screw is merited based
solely on the Get Home Factor. If I were going to make ocean passages, like to Bermuda,
or endure the long coastal passages like those required on the Pacific Coast, or venture to
remote places like Alaska’s SE Passage and down to Mexico, I probably would not have
given away a working get home set up.
Something else that must be considered is the issue of protection for the running
gear. The underwater hardware of most twin-screws is much more exposed to collision
danger than a single screw with a full keel. That complete, redundant propulsion system
means you have increased your chances of snagging a lobster trap or bending a rudder on
a submerged log. I’m not sophisticated enough to do the actual math, but wouldn’t twice
the rudders and twice the props mean you’ve doubled your chances of hitting something?
I love knowing that my big rudder is hiding behind my even bigger full keel. I have
dragged that keel through a few inches of hard sand more than once, with no damage. I
have watched many a lobster pot buoys go by the chine, winced, and then sighed with
relief as it appeared in my wake.
So, in the category of “Get Home”, I will admit that you have a better chance of
getting home when you begin a voyage with two engines than with just one. But you
should consider what kind of risk you face in the first place: where do you cruise, and
how long you might have to wait for assistance? Running aground, dragging anchor, bad
fuel and bad weather are all likely calamities you might face, and a second engine solves
none of those. In my case, I spend my time keeping the single running in top shape and
renew my commercial assistance membership faithfully.

Maneuvering
The whole debate about twin verses single sometimes centers around the issue of
maneuvering, and too many people assume that a twin screw is inherently more
maneuverable than a single. When considering which style of boat handles better, one has
to remember the bias that grows after years of maneuvering a particular style. A person
builds up a level of experience and skills through practice and regular attendance at the
school of hard knocks. Since boat owners tend gain almost all their maneuvering
experience behind the wheel of their own boat, they develop a skill set for that style
because they operate that style almost exclusively.
Skippers who have had years of experience with twins often discover that
maneuvering a single screw presents a challenge that seems insurmountable; they suffer
from LOLS (lack of lever syndrome). The symptoms of LOLS are usually a mixture of
the following complaints: the boat won’t back up straight, the boat won’t spin in a circle,
the boat refuses to back to port/starboard (pick one), the bow swings to port/starboard
(pick one) when I use reverse to slow down, I can’t back out of my slip, I can’t make tiny
“fine tuning” adjustments in tight quarters, the rudder is too big.
Just across the harbor, the single screw guys have their own challenges to deal
with when attempting a switch to twins: way too many levers and way too much to think
about. This is called Extra Lever Disorder (ELD), and once again is manifested by a
variety of complaints: the boat won’t back up predictably, the bow swings to
port/starboard when I use some power to slow down, it feels like there are no rudders
when going backwards, I can’t walk the stern sideways, the rudders are too small, I can
never remember which lever to move, turning the helm has no effect when going slow in
tight quarters, why can’t I move both levers together and just drive it like a single?
If you have ever made the switch from one style to the other, perhaps you have
suffered from one of these ailments?
There are some common generalizations made about twin verses single that I
think should be challenged. I don’t agree that it is more difficult to learn to handle a twin-
screw. Skillful handling of either style requires a high degree of concentration,
experience and practice. I don’t agree that one style is easier to drive than the other. In
general, a twin requires a lot of shifting, and a single requires a lot of helm turning. I
don’t agree that a twin is generally more maneuverable than a single, but I do concede
that having two screws does make some maneuvers easier to execute, like turning the
boat in its own length.
There are times when the limits of my single screw forces me make a choice that I
probably wouldn’t face with a twin. For instance, in a strong cross wind approaching a
Tee head, the decision as to whether I tie port side or starboard side to will be made by
the prevailing conditions, especially when I’m single handing. A well behaved twin-
screw would still allow the choice. Or a bow thruster…
I have a sort of running joke about bow thrusters when people ask me if my boat
has one. I always say “Sure”, and point to the steering wheel. I watch for a confused look
to cross their brow, and then I add, “Every time I move that wheel, the bow moves.” Of
course that’s an exaggeration, because we all know that water has to be moving past the
rudder for me to achieve the results that I claim. But the joke makes my point that a
propeller in a tunnel isn’t the only way to move the bow. A bow thruster does allow one
to push the bow side to side even when the boat is not moving, or (even better) when the
bow is moving in the wrong direction, such as when a cross wind is setting you towards
something that you would really rather being going away from. However, the prudent
skipper knows that it is just one tool in his maneuvering kit, rather than the only tool.
Bow thrusters have their limitations. Electric ones are notorious for their inability
to sustain any more than short bursts of operation; more than that and they tend to trip a
breaker. Hydraulic thrusters are more reliable, but also more complicated and expensive.
In either case, the actual thrust produced may not be enough to overcome high winds or
strong currents. For the skipper who thinks his bow thruster will solve all his
maneuvering problems, the existence of the bow thruster becomes a detriment. Too often
I see a skipper attempting a tricky maneuver that will require a bow thruster. His bow
thruster will either choose that moment to fail, or the skipper learns that the thruster isn’t
up to the job. Either way, that skipper is now in real trouble, pinned against a piling or
moored boat, or worse. If the skipper’s boat hadn’t been equipped with a bow thruster to
begin with, he probably would not have attempted this maneuver. The presence of the
bow thruster became the root of a bad decision.
While composing this article, I had to take a few minutes to run down to the end
of the dock and assist a transient boater who was obviously having trouble approaching
the end of our dock, which is a 100’ T-head, requiring only the ability to approach and tie
“side to”. There was about 10kts of wind blowing him off the dock. The transient boat
was a twin-screw forty-five footer, (not a trawler) and was equipped with a bow thruster.
This poor boater could not get his stern close enough to allow his wife to step off the
boat. In fact, he could barely get close enough for her to successfully throw the stern line
to me. Once I had the stern line, he had no idea how to use that to spring the boat up to
the dock. My point is that a bow thruster is not a replacement for a lack of skill. A bow
thruster is just another tool at your disposal, like the throttle(s), gearbox(s) and rudder(s)
are. Indeed, my example concerns a twin-screw boat equipped with a bow thruster.
When it comes to maneuvering, I don’t think that a twin-screw has any significant
advantages.

Costs
Its common sense that maintaining two engines will cost more than one. But how
much more? And is there a way to recoup a return on the investment made on a second
engine? Every year, I run up the ICW from Myrtle Beach, SC to Block Island, RI. I spend
four months in RI, then in the fall make a return trip. I average about 300 engine hours
every year. My FL120 has 1800 hrs on it, and my original fuel tanks are pretty dirty. Lets
do a quick exercise to see what a second engine would cost.
First are the hourly costs to run the engine; fuel, filters, and fluids. I change my
oil every 150 hours, and my Racors last about 50 hours, so just oil and filters for my
round trip from Myrtle Beach to Block Island runs about $110 (six gal oil, 2 oil filters, 6
Racor cartridges). I’ll burn about 800 gal of fuel – lets make the math easy and say $2/gal
– that’s $1710 for my single engine ICW trip each year for fuel, oil and filters.
How much more would a twin-screw cost for that same trip? The fuel burn is the
hardest factor, but 50% more is a very conservative estimate that would be hard to beat,
which means I would burn an additional 400 gallons with a twin screw. That’s an
additional $800 for fuel, and another $110 for oil/filters; equals $910 extra costs.
Certainly, your fuel filters might last longer, or you may go 200 hours before changing
oil, but I think my numbers are pretty average for used boats with Ford Lehmans.
Now, we have to add up the annual incidentals, like belts, hoses, air filters, pencil
zincs, impellors. I estimate that I spend about $100/yr on that stuff. Again, double that
budget for a twin, and add it to the hourly fuel/oil/filter cost of $910. Round it all off and
you have $1000 extra in annual expenses for a 300 hour season with two engines.
Wait, there’s more! The long term expenses which are more difficult to quantify
but certainly need to fit into the equation someplace. Besides, you’re not just maintaining
a second engine, but a second drive train. Cutlass bearings, stuffing boxes, shaft
alignment, shaft straightening, propeller balancing and tuning, injector services, valve
adjustments, water pump rebuilds, exhaust systems, alternator replacements, hoses,
clamps, coolant, heat exchangers….the list goes on. To make the math really easy,
assume that the costs of long term and major repair expenses adds another $700 per year,
for one drive train. For each of those items, can anyone argue that the costs of owning
two of them wouldn’t be twice the cost of owning one?
Now comes the grand total, add the $1000 and the $700 together – it would cost
me $1700 more per year to own and operate a second drive train. That’s in interesting
number for me, because that would almost cover the hourly costs ($1710) for my annual
round trip on the ICW. Put another way, it would cover 34 nights of marina stays at
$50/night. Those 30 nights at marinas might go a long way to save your relationship with
your cruising partners.
One more point on the savings – if you save $1700 per year, in eight years you
will have saved enough to purchase a brand new American Diesel 135hp to replace your
single FL120.
Of course, we haven’t mentioned the time involved with maintenance. If you are
like me, you do all of your own routine maintenance. So far, the cost figures mentioned
don’t include hiring a mechanic for things like oil changes or engine alignments. For
instance, when it was time for the injectors to be rebuilt, I pulled them myself. Boaters
who pay professionals for engine work are bound to have dramatically higher expenses
for a twin-screw boat. But even providing your own labor still means that a second
engine will double your parts bill. In the grand scheme of things, I don’t think that the
maintenance hours are a deal breaker if you are the kind of boater that enjoys tinkering in
the engine room; a little extra maintenance may even be a good thing.
When considering this maintenance issue, most twin-screw owners will admit that
they covet the engine room space of the singles, especially the ability to access both sides
of the engine with equal ease.
Keeping costs down may not be your main consideration. If you only have limited
cruising schedules (or an unlimited cruising budget), than the ability to cover lots of
miles quickly may out weigh the desire to cover those miles cheaply. The increasing
demand and availability high speed, big horsepower semi-displacement trawlers certainly
seems to indicate that today’s buyers are more interested in speed than budget. If that’s
the case, your decision may favor a twin-screw, assuming the hull was designed to go
that fast. Modern designs allow a boat that looks like a trawler to exceed her hull speed;
hence the term ‘semi-displacement’, and they can do so with either one or two engines.
The ability to exceed hull speed is really dependant on hull design and horsepower, rather
than how many propellers you have. But the used boat shopper should be forewarned;
most of the older trawlers, like Marine Traders, CHBs and Grand Banks, are really more
like a full displacement hull, and adding a second engine will not push the boat much
faster than hull speed*. So don’t automatically think that two engines will get you there
any faster than one.

Summary
OK, you caught me. Maybe I am a little bias. When I was in high school, my very
first summer job was as a mate on the Fire Island ferries. That was where I first leaned
how to really handle a boat, not just drive one. All of those ferries were twins, and I could
hardly believe the things I could do once I was taught by some of the saltier captains.
About 4 years ago, I learned how to drive a triple screw 110’ crew boat – which will go
sideways without a bow thruster if you know the secret. To earn my living, I drive a huge
RIB powered my two jet drives. For the purpose of moving a small cruising trawler at
hull speed, I’m a huge fan of the simple single-screw.

*Calculating your hull speed is very easy: Hull Speed=1.34 times the square root
of the waterline length. Here is a great little web page that will do the calculation for you:
http://www.sailingusa.info/cal__hull_speed.htm. All you need to know is your waterline
length.