1980 Chris Craft 410 Commander

[oak_box]

I'm looking at buying a 1980 Chris Craft 410 Commander....

Nope, she's not a trawler, though the interior accommodations are as good as I've seen on most of the trawlers that I've looked at (in the 40' range).

To that end, does anyone know if a CC 410 Commander will run as nicely as I would hope / expect at "trawler speeds"?

This one has been in a covered slip on fresh water for at least the last 20 years, and came from a fresh water lake before that. That part is good. Unfortunately, at this point, we have a zebra muscle infestation on Lake Travis - so the entire bottom is most likely covered. Last bottom job was maybe 12 years ago?

In general, the boat appears to be in good condition (I have not had a survey <yet>), other than everything being rather dated, and obviously not much care in recent years.

Given the zebra muscle and growth issue, it will not be practical to do a realistic inspection of the bottom as part of the survey. I won't really know what I'm dealing with until the boat has been hauled, cleaned, and given a new bottom job, with whatever fiberglass repair is required. So this is a known HUGE risk.

I have a mechanic friend looking at the engines with me (gas Marine Power 454's). I won't buy the boat if we can't get the engines to start. Assuming we get the engines to start, I'm still allowing for a LOT of work there (carbs, full tune up, possible head work on one side).

Bottom line - it's a project boat, and I fully understand that. However, the price is right, and cheap enough that I can afford to put a significant amount of $$ into the bottom, engines, AC, and other random stuff (possibly replacing holding tank, water tanks, or fuel tanks? Bilge pumps, heads?)

Still trying to figure out if I'm crazy for jumping into this...
I do kinda' like messing around with old boats, and seem to fall into project boats. This one has a LOT of potential to be a nice boat if restored to reliable operation.

I really like the full walk around master bed, separate showers in the heads, lots of storage space, decent galley layout, lots of open space in the main salon and on the upper deck, and that it's a classic boat. I found the Chris Craft Command Club web page - and it has a TREMENDOUS amount of information about this family of boats, and lots of still active owners that know lots of good stuff. So that is really helpful too.

Another factor is that it's already on my lake. I had been looking at trawlers in the Galveston area. To get one hauled up to Austin would cost between $10-20K, as the flybridge would have to be removed, then re-assembled here. Most of the trawlers with similar live-aboard style layouts would also need unknown levels of repairs. So again, the cheap price allows the possibility to fix up / replace a lot of stuff, without spending a lot of $$ to get it here.

Again, it's not a trawler, but hopefully will run rather nicely at trawler speeds. And signing up for a project like this just may make me crazy enough to belong in this group...

 

[Comodave]

They are a very nice boat but the engine room is tight and the fuel tanks are small, but on a lake that won’t be an issue. They do have great layouts but there are a lot of different layouts depending on the particular year. They have tremendous room in them so overall a nice boat. Who cares if it is a proper trawler or not, it is going to be used on a lake. As to the bottom that is another issue. I have not heard of CCs having bottom problems it is certainly possible. Will the current owner get the bottom cleaned so you can have it inspected? If at all possible that is the way I would make the offer. If not, do you feel lucky? Cause that is the chance you will be taking. Are you handy working on boats? Can you do or learn to do fiberglass work? If so then if the bottom is covered with muscles and the current owner won’t clean the bottom then make a low offer and roll the dice... Anyway hope it works out for you, good luck. BTW the 47 Commander is one of my favorite boats except for the vertical ladder to the bridge.

 

[rslifkin]

The hull design is pretty similar to my 381 Catalina. Modified V planing hull, has a bit of keel that's cut away before the props. Should have nice, big trim tabs (mine are 48x12). Mine runs quite nicely at 6.5 - 7 kts, although in any kind of following sea, you're going to want to throttle up and use the big engines. These hulls run very nicely up on plane at 16 - 18 kts, so you have a good "make some time" option available. There is some noise from chine slap up forward when anchored, but it's nothing terrible in my opinion.

At a basic level, the Chris Crafts of that era are built solidly. Stringers are hollow fiberglass boxes, hulls are pretty thick and solid. Do be aware that there's a chance of deck coring issues around stanchions, cleats, etc. Chris Craft was not great about sealing the deck coring back then. They usually just drilled through it and installed stuff with sealant. So if that sealant fails, the core gets wet. The only other wood to worry about is the bottom end of the bulkheads, mostly the aft engine room bulkhead. But even if that needs attention, it's not a big deal to do.

Engine-wise, even if the engines are shot, at the right price it might be worth it. Replacement 454 long blocks are cheap (can be had for as little as $4 - 5k depending on the builder). And if the blocks and heads are fine, a rebuild is always an option.

For engine room access, it'll definitely involve crawling, but the pictures I've seen don't make it look any worse than mine. Basic checks shouldn't be hard at all (there's good space between the engines to drop down into), so it's only certain tasks that are a little tough to get to.

Expect the draft to be more than the published 3'4". Probably closer to 4 feet. Mine is listed as 3'0", but based on what I've found to be the waterline in fresh water with a few extra people aboard, it's really about 3'8".

On an inland lake, fuel capacity will be a non-issue. It carries 350 gallons, so if you ever take it away from the lake, figure 250 gallons usable for planning purposes. Up on plane, that'll likely get you about 125 nautical miles. At low speed (7 kts or less), probably about 320 nm.

 

[PM]

Don't be afraid of that boat ! C.C. Commanders are great boats. Don't even be afraid if the engines are bad, it might be a blessing in disguise. Let me explain:

1) Replacing gassers is cheap. Even big blocks can be replaced for about $5,000 each.
2) Engine room space on the 41 is tight. A couple of in line six cylinders would be a nice fit, leave you lots of room.( No more getting up on a plane though)
3) Do some research. One of the big diesel manufacturers just came out with a small diesel, around 50 hp, compact and light. Two of them would be a sweet combination.

Remember, that particular boat will long outlast any gasser, no matter how much care has been given to it. Gassers are "tired" at 1,500 hours and usually dead at 2,000. So, don't expect a lot out of those 40 year old engines.

My standard advice...Go For It!!!

PS, what is the asking price? How about some pictures.

pete

 

[rslifkin]

If a diesel conversion were in the cards, in my mind the choices would be between Cummins QSBs, Yanmar 8LVs (which aren't any heavier than the 454s) or maybe the Yanmar 6LY. Any of those can be had in power ratings that would happily push the boat to 18 - 20 kts before hitting max continuous output (with more speed available at WOT). But once you factor in the cost of engines, transmissions, a new generator, labor, etc. it's easily north of $100k, so probably not worth doing (even though I'd love to do it on my boat if I had the $$$). The hulls on these boats are good enough at going fast (and bad at going too slow in a following sea) that I don't think a repower that can't get it on plane would make sense.

For engine lifespan, 454s that haven't been run excessively hard and aren't the higher output versions generally last pretty well. As long as they're propped to hit 4200+ at WOT, figure 3400 RPM is max continuous and stay at or below that level for a good lifespan (on that boat I'd figure max continuous will likely be around 18 kts). One of mine was replaced due to a failed oil cooler line that wasn't caught fast enough with around 1400 hours on it (before I got the boat). The other is still original with about 1500 hours. I can't really tell the difference between the 100 hour engine and the 1500 hour engine in how they run. The older one goes through a little bit more oil than the newer one, but nothing major, still has good compression, etc.

The biggest thing that'll kill a 454 is letting the risers go too long and then they leak water into the exhaust ports and rust things up. Keep all of those bits in good shape and they're pretty durable engines, as they aren't being pushed all that hard relative to their design.

 

[oak_box]

Thanks for the responses guys!!

Comodave, I'll most likely be on Lake Travis in Texas for another 5-10years. But my hope is that the 410 Commander would make a reasonable coastal cruiser, if and when, I get there. With current engines and tanks, I'll be slightly limited in range, so won't be able to do the long stretches of the great loop. But that should be ok.

I can get a diver to hopefully clear the engine intakes, and give me pictures of the bottom. To haul a 40' boat here is $1000, plus another $1500-$2500 to remove the muscles from the bottom. Too expensive to do pre-purchase, and then haul a second time for the bottom job... So yes, rolling the dice on the bottom, and hopeful the solid reputation pays off. Even if I have to put $10k into the bottom job, I'll still come out fine.

I'm excited about the potential, but not without significant pucker factor... &#55357;&#56833;

 

[rslifkin]

The boat is definitely capable as a coastal cruiser. As far as range for the loop, it's actually do-able. IIRC, the longest stretch without fuel is about 250 miles or about 220 nautical miles. Even with the thirsty 454s, that should be about 175 gallons at 7 kts, give or take a little. So you'd lose the option of running fast on that stretch, but at lower speeds it's got the range to do it with plenty of fuel left over.

 

[Comodave]

Well good luck with it, I certainly like the boat and I really like flush deck motoryachts. Keep us up to speed on what happens and BTW we need photos!

 

[rsn48]

I will link you to an article in two parts by the late David Pascoe. Basically he says anything 34 feet and under is best served by gas, anything bigger you are better off with diesel. I just replaced my old Merc (marinized gas Chevy engine) with a newly designed, non-automotive Merc engine and leg. Trust me it wasn't $5,000. Even if you add another zero it cost more than that. But I also added a new Merc Bravo 2 leg.

So, first your old items have to be removed. If I were in your shoes, I'd go with a larger diesel but a single. I'd look at adding a bow thruster if she doesn't have one. The single engine will give you more space below, but modifications to the hull to accept the new single won't be cheap. And while the refit guys are in the hull removing the engines, I'd replace the fuel tanks as well, just get the pain over with all at once.

From what I now know, I'd not trust gas engines from the 80's.

https://www.yachtsurvey.com/GasDiesel.htm

 

[rslifkin]

Pascoe takes anything that could be a concern and turns it into "the sky is falling". He also says that gassers will be dead in 1000 hours or less in most cases, which has been disproven many times.

454s are adequate power for that hull (and mine), although diesels would be better. They'd be much more efficient and it would be easy to find ones that could handle cruising a bit faster than the fairly low max continuous output of the 454s allows. The single biggest issue with gassers in these boats is fuel consumption. The hulls are efficient enough that the engines aren't being worked to death and dead in 1000 hours.

As far as repower cost for gas engines, the $5k or so in parts number (per engine) was to replace with another set of 454 big blocks like the boat already has. Repowering to something different would definitely cost far more.

Converting that hull to a single would be a never-been-done nightmarish undertaking and IMO, it's downright stupid unless you want to put in a huge single. It's not a sluggish, water plowing semi-displacement hull. It's a proper planing hull and meant to get up and run at times.

On fuel tanks, the stock tanks in that boat are most likely aluminum, not black iron / steel, so they may still have plenty of life in them. I'm not sure where the tanks are located in a 410, but there's a good chance that in typical Chris Craft form, they're all the way aft (probably under the aft bunk). If that's the case, engines in vs out makes no difference in effort to remove the tanks.

A boat like that with gassers does have one big advantage: there are plenty out there and not much market, so they're dirt cheap.

 

[rsn48]

On fuel tanks, the stock tanks in that boat are most likely aluminum

Aluminum Fuel Tanks
January 2, 2015Neil Haynes
For those of you who now own or intend to buy a vessel with aluminum fuel tanks, here are a few things to ponder. There are lots of things that contribute to aluminum fuel tank failures: materials, construction, installation, environment, corrosion and for gasoline powered vessels, fuel quality and additives. The National Technical Information Service did a fairly comprehensive study in conjunction with the U.S.C.G. on aluminum fuel tanks causes of failures. The bottom line is that most aluminum fuel tanks will not last as long as the vessel they are installed in.

Here are some of the pertinent facts reported in this study for your consideration:

Tanks failed in recreational boats from three to 27 years old, both in fresh and salt water.
There were no common problems connected to the reported failures.
Based on the wide range of data, it was not possible to make a realistic determination of the average life of aluminum tanks.
Tanks are prone to failure for a number of reasons, even when installed as required by federal regulations.
Boats of any size are susceptible to tank failures.
75% of boats with failed tanks had inboard engines.
If a problem occurs, it is difficult to detect and repairs will be complex and expensive.
The most alarming fact was 23% of the owners of gasoline powered boats continued to operate them after a problem was detected.
Most of the corrosion failures were due to corrosion on the bottom of the tanks. Aluminum tanks can be affected by pitting, crevice and galvanic corrosion.
55% of these problems involved removing permanent structures to access below deck fuel tanks.
The repairs ranged any where from a few hours to several months.
92% of reported failures were due to corrosion.
Fatigue fractures were mostly confined to tanks with a minimum thickness of .090.
45% of the subject vessels were purchased new.
Only 16% of the cases received any form of help from the manufacturer after a problem occurred.
45% of the cases reported using a fuel additive, like octane booster.
When tanks were replaced, shops generally recommended a thicker .125 inch tank with a chromate primer coating.One really interesting fact revealed in this study was the misconception that storing boats with fuel tanks full actually contributed to corrosion problems due to the concept of “heat capacity of a surfaces.” The large mass of a full fuel tank results in a lower heating and cooling rate for the lower surface of a tank. This large mass means that any condensation which forms on the lower surface of the tank will be retained for longer periods of time as this surface will be the last to respond to ambient temperature. The retention of condensation on the lower surface of the tank will prolong the activity of any corrosion cells which may be present, thus tending to propagate the corrosion process.So what does all this mean to all of us, your prospective as a potential buyer or owner and me a as an inspector?
Here is my take. I have seen lots of tank failures with lots of reasons. A screw through a bulkhead touching a tank; $15,000 repair cost. Poultice corrosion due to pop off inspection covers degrading and tank top debris holding moisture; $ 4,000 repair cost. Cracked weld on a high end sport fisherman due to improper support: $10,000 repair cost. We had to cut two windows in one vessel’s transom and remove tanks out the stern as the most cost affective solution. Cause was improper support as builder used moisture absorbent gasket material causing severe corrosion: $ 5,000.00 per side repair cost. A 1997 fuel tank that pit, corroded from the inside and failed after three years usage and cause was not confirmed.

As an inspector of lots of different types of vessels, I can only inspect what I can see, and it is what we can’t see that bothers me. If you own or intend to buy an older vessel, 12-15 years old, especially a gasoline powered vessel, be prepared for what we see on a frequent basis, the necessity of fuel tank replacement. The older the vessel, the more likely you are to have problems with tanks and usually these problems are costly. One notable tank manufacturer only warrants their tanks out one year. Don’t depend on your insurance company to solve your problem, as most policies will not cover corrosion.

Lots of the folks I come in contact with don’t have pockets deep enough to barely own the boat, much less plop out thousands of dollars for a tank replacement. My advise to prospective buyers, don’t bite off more than you can chew. If you own an older vessel, especially gasoline powered, frequent inspections of fuel components and visible tank surfaces will help to advert disaster.

Use your nose and practice safe recommended fueling practices. A gas fume detector is good equipment to have on board for gasoline powered vessels. If you suspect a fuel tank problem, cease operation immediately and turn off AC and DC power and contact a respectable repair facility. If you have to replace a fuel tank, insure that your chosen repairer knows how to comply with Federal regulations (CFR 183.501-183-590). Also a good understanding of American Yacht and Boat Council recommended practices H-24 for gasoline fuel systems.

Leaking fuel tanks can lead to possible heavy federal fines, so don’t postpone action. Many insurance companies have spill clauses, so investigate coverage clauses with your agent or carrier. Be prepared.

We once pressure tested a suspected diesel tank that held adequate pressure for 24 hours, only later to discover the fractured weld was sitting atop a gasket. A pressure test is not an appropriate diagnostic procedure in my opinion, especially on a thinner older tank as you may burst the tank or a corrosion cell in the process. A global visual inspection is the only way to really know what problems may exist on the outer surfaces of a tank.

Here’s hoping that your fuel stays where it belongs, in your tank. And remember, the Lord loves boaters.

©Neil K. Haynes March 9, 2005

 

[Comodave]

I would never consider changing this boat to a single. The costs would be astronomical and the resale value would be minimal. If it needs repowering stick with what it has and live with it. The boat has been powered like that for 30+ years and it has worked ok. The 454s while not optimal would be ok for slow cruising. It may not be the absolute best boat for coastal cruising but it can work. You will have to be careful on long runs for fuel consumption. But if it is the boat you are able to get and maintain then that is what you have to work with. Learn how to make it work as good as possible for your needs. Have fun.

 

[rslifkin]

My aluminum tanks are .190" thick and still look good after 34 years everywhere I can see. But at that age they do scare me a little with gas in them. I don't hear mention of failure in the Chris Craft groups, so as long as the tanks look good, I wouldn't worry too much.

 

[PM]

rsn48 Saying he would convert it to single tells me he doesn't really know boats very well. He precedes this ridiculous suggestion with the unsupported claim that he spent over $50,000 for a gasser replacement. Totally nuts. And not trusting gas engines from the 80's? Where is this guy coming from?

If you are on a budget, replace the 454's with a couple short or long blocks. If you have deep pockets or big plans, convert to twin diesels.

pete

 

[oak_box]

Thanks for the thoughts and conversation.

I wouldn't go to the trouble of replacing the engines unless I had to, and even then, would go with 454's to avoid having to rework transmissions, props, exhaust, etc. If I did have to replace one of both engines, it would be really nice to get the electronic readouts!

On my inland lake, gas engines are better than diesel for my circumstance for two reasons: 1) diesel fuel is much harder to find on my lake. 2) it's hard enough to find a competent mechanic for GAS engines around here. I can't imagine trying to find a diesel mechanic, never mind a GOOD one!!! Neither of those is a problem on the coast. But for the next several years, those are the cards I have to deal with. And 454's are very well known engines with good parts availability.

I was told the gas tanks are under the aft berth. Will definitely check them out. I would be much more willing to replace those than the engines, and might even consider installing SMALLER tanks for now, as I generally don't burn through gas all that fast. Would love fuel a flow meter, but they seem stupidly overpriced, and not sure if they would read low flow rates accurately.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. ob. "Would love fuel a flow meter...". Garmin has a system that interfaces with some of their GPS units. https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/p/11561

 

[sunchaser]

Hmmmmm. Zebra mussels. Any chance they've gotten into the heat exchangers, AC systems or shafts?

 

[oak_box]

Yes, the little bastards get into everything. The bad news is that since the boat has been sitting, the bottom will be covered. The good news , I hope, is that since it was barely used, hopefully not up inside the engines or AC.

Though, the AC systems are old, at least 20 years, and cool only... So if I replace one of both of those, it would be a good thing. Modern digital controls, an all in one package, and reverse cycle to give me heat as well as cool, would all be a huge improvement.

Bless his heart, the PO remembers when everything worked great, and thinks the boat is worth top dollar. I'm looking at an older classic, assuming everything could fail as soon as I sign... It would be nice if most of the systems would work at least long enough to get around to them in an orderly manner. &#55357;&#56833;

 

[oak_box]

RT,

So, boats are supposed to come with modern GPS units????? &#55357;&#56833;

This one will definitely need an upgrade. That would be something to keep in mind.

 

[PM]

I put a Loran C on my first boat. I thought it was the cat's meow!

pete

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. ob. "So, boats are supposed to come with modern GPS units?" Nope, never said that. Simply a response to your comment "...fuel a flow meter, but they seem stupidly overpriced..." $200 doesn't seem overpriced to me IF you have a Garmin unit that will accept the input. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[oak_box]

RT,
I was teasing about the expectation of a NEMA enabled GPS.

Though for a serious cruiser, not a bad idea.

We could debate the markup of Garmin sensors, though they probably aren't any worse than anyone else, and that would be a different thread... &#55357;&#56833;

John

 

[moparharn]

Just looked at one this morning

I looked at a 410 commander this morning here in Detroit. The boat has been on the hard for 3-6 years. What a battle wagon. I doubt the mussels have done much damage to the hull. $2500 to haul and clean the bottom? Where are you, downtown Manhattan? Should be $100 to $250 to haul, and $150 to $250 to high pressure high temp power wash the bastards off. No more than $500. I could get it done here for $250 max. They blast right off i they are single season. Not sure about what you are looking at. The boat I looked at was completely original. Looked like steel tanks under the aft cabin beds. They appeared as new from the outside. No leaks (no cover either). White painted 454's carbureted. Crawl in engine room was not too cramped. How you get them out should be researched by you (does not look easy). This one is a flybridge, so I would guess low speed operation comes with a degree of rolling. A pair of Lehmans in there would be nice, or possibly 671N lay downs, or even 471's. There is a diesel engine warehouse in Niles Michigan that advertises all over the net and Ebay. Call them for a suitable diesel alternative. They are both used and rebuilt diesels.
After looking at this boat and seeing what decent examples sell for around here, I would not spend more than $5,000 to assume the driveline risk and all the tired soft goods. Nice ones sell for $20,000 to $40,000. If you are looking at spending much more, I would rethink what you are doing. I would be happy to put you onto this boat, but it is a flybridge and transport would suck.
I think Comodave is right. The 47 is the real deal. Maybe the coolest 46-47 FDMY ever made. I like Hatteras too. The Berts are the best quality, but interiors are not so hot. Viking, Ocean, and Egg have too many wet coring issues for me. A minty fresh water 427 center oiler 47 commander is like finding a barn fresh 427 AC Cobra. I am still holding out for my first trawler.

Question- I looked at a 50 foot Grand Banks Woodie today also. Absolutely incredible boat (not this one, but rather the model) Does anyone know of a shipwright in Michigan that could restore the waterline down on that boat for me. 5-10 planks and a cotton/sealer caulking job? This boat is majestic, but terrifying to to me as far as the wood goes. I would dive in head first to own that kind of quality and history, but I would need someone to head the work who would be fair in pricing. I don't know anyone to do this for me.

 

[alormaria]

I put a Loran C on my first boat. I thought it was the cat's meow!

pete

I finally removed my Loran C last summer. I don't think it's coming back.

 

[Comodave]

I finally removed my Loran C last summer. I don't think it's coming back.

Not any time soon...

 

[timb7734]

I owned a Chris 41 in the late nineties on Lake Erie. Solid glass hulls probably 2” thick. Yanmar made an engine back then that would replace the 454’s without any prop or transmission changes. Lowered the top end but increased economy greatly. Mine was an SD hull, so it ain’t going much more than 12 or 13 however much horsepower you wish to apply. I did not have trouble with deck coring, some rewiring necessary. Very comfortable and roomy for a couple, but the V berth forward was not much fun for guests, but then they didn’t stay long! Hahaha.

Biggest problems from my experience were the boat was awful in head seas, following seas and beam seas. But then after a few poundings we just stayed at the dock until weather was conducive to comfortable passages. Most of the destinations on Lake Erie were short trips 20 to 50 miles. The other big problem was the black water tank was steel and it rotted out to be replaced by moi with plastic. I suspect the fuel tanks were steel as well.

But OH! The memories of dinner and copious bottles of wine on that back deck! It wasn’t much fun to swim off or dinghy from because of the long climb up the transom, but no problem if the weather and sea state were calm.

 

[rslifkin]

I'm not sure about doing it without prop or trans changes, but there are definitely a few diesel options that will fit where the 454s are now.

As far as seas, based on my similar hull, beam seas are unpleasant, particularly at low speed. Head seas at low speed can have some uncomfortable pitching, as the bow is pretty full and quite buoyant, so it will pretty much go up and over at any cost. At higher speeds, head seas aren't bad (just a bit wet) unless they're really choppy, then it can get a bit uncomfortable. Following seas are fine as long as you're going fast enough. Get too slow and the big, flat transom and small rudders make it a nasty ride.

 

[Boatboy45]

I had a CC41 for 10 years and loved the boat. The 454's were gas guzzlers, .5 to .75 gallons per mile at displacement speed,gets worse from there. Layout is great and boat was solid. Only big issue I had was the waste tank rotted out. Not really expensive, just a nasty failure and cleanup. I do have a warning about the design. The engine room access hatch is located in a high traffic area. Block access whenever its open. Personal bad experience.

 

[Group9]

Well good luck with it, I certainly like the boat and I really like flush deck motoryachts. Keep us up to speed on what happens and BTW we need photos!

I've always admired flush deck motor yachts. So when we decided to swap from sail to power, I told my wife, that that was the only style of boat I even wanted to look at.

 

[rslifkin]

I do have a warning about the design. The engine room access hatch is located in a high traffic area. Block access whenever its open. Personal bad experience.

Good point. Mine is right in the middle of the salon and requires you to carefully step across / around it if it's open. So warnings about watching for that are frequent.