1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2002 Moody 42 Vs 1996 Moody 44

Discussion in 'Thinking of buying a Moody ask a question here' started by Graham Smith, 23/10/16.

  1. Hi

    Looking at a couple of centre cockpit Moody yachts.

    One is a 42 from 2002. Interior looks surprisingly worn for such a recent boat, but I'm attracted to it as a newer boat, it's only 14 years old. The other is a 44 from 1996, which looks to be in better condition and doesn't have a teak deck, so that's a bonus. The 44 is also somewhat less costly despite being a bigger boat (though I don't need the extra 2 feet).

    Makes me wonder why the 42 is priced where it is.

    Question is, what can you tell me about the design of these two - the 42 is apparently a lengthened 40. What about Moody build quality and engineering in that period? Is the newer boat likely to be a better buy simply down to the age? Are there are problems emerging in Moody as we head into the 2000's and the eventual demise of the company as it had been?

    Comments welcome.

    Thanks
     
  2. Neil Eccles

    Neil Eccles Neil Eccles Executive Committee

    Messages:
    3,478
    MOA Position:
    Website Editor
    Boat name:
    CUTAWAY
    Boat type:
    Moody 42
    Cruising area:
    West Coast of France and North Coast Of Spain
    Hi Graham - dont worry about the build quality of the M42. We have one and it is very very solid.

    The M44 will probably sail a little better though. It was once described by an eminent member of the Moody family as one of the best boats they ever built.

    Having said that the M42 is a much newer design, looks more attractive with the teak toe caps, holds its value well, sails well, has much the same fixtures and fittings as the M44 and is very comfortable indeed.

    Another difference is that the M44 has a shaft drive and most M42s have sail drives. I would not worry about sail drives but you may have a personal preference.

    It worries me that the one you have looked at looks tired. In making your decision you would probably need to factor in some refurbishment of both boats - expensive bits tend to be engines, rigging, sails.

    For the M42, look at the rudder shaft - see if it has been leaking into the void under the bunk. Ask if it has ever been modified. There were a batch of M42s and similar construction models where Princess Yachts used the wrong adhesive to bond the stainless rudder tube to the epoxy tube outer. They leak, so need a fix. Our M42 was done by Princess under guarantee and many boats have been modified too.

    Hope this helps

    Kindest

    Neil
     
  3. Hi Neil

    Thanks for this, that's very helpful. Great to hear from an owner...!

    I'm basing the judgement about the "tired" interior on the high resolution photos the broker sent me. Need to see it in the flesh as it were but it looks worn and the timber had faded significantly in some areas so it's uneven in colour.

    As far as the need for refurbishment etc - yes, I understand that. I don't mind some work, but equally I do not want a project, so on that basis, an older boat that's been cared for and gradually upgraded over its life is a better bet for me than a newer one that's had no work and lots of the expensive bits need refurbishing. (I looked at a boat a couple of week's ago (not a Moody) that was priced reasonably, but needed more than the asking price spent on it straight away. Bit alarming how the costs added up, I had two yards quote for the work).

    Both these two boats are with the same broker, which is helpful (albeit different offices). I'll ask the Q about the technical bits on the M42, thanks for the tip.

    Graham
     
  4. Peter Wright

    Peter Wright Peter Wright

    Messages:
    1,280
    Boat name:
    WILD THYME
    Boat type:
    Moody 425
    Cruising area:
    North Sea, English Channel, Biscay
    Hi Graham,

    Great advice, as always, from Neil. We have a M425, older than either of the boats you're looking at and, perhaps half way between in terms of how she sails. When we were looking 6 years ago, any of the 3 models would have served, so condition, equipment and price all mattered more than the actual model.

    Of the various 44 layouts, I was never fond of the "armchairs" in the earlier saloons, so much preferred the later saloons with settee berths and we would have preferred the second stateroom up forward to the extra cabin with bunks.

    I share your view that the absence of teak decks is an advantage - lovely though they are, they're also an expense waiting to happen.

    I reckon that after 15 years, a yacht is getting to the stage that major bits need replacing - standing rigging, engine, electronics, hatch / portlight glazing. Sails and running rigging are unlikely to go beyond 10 years unless the boat is hardly used.. So, on either model, it would be the one that had most of these big ticket jobs done in recent years that would win for me.

    Both these models feature solid grp hulls, so no concerns about wet cores there but, of course, the decks are balsa cored, reinforced with timber pads in way of fittings. Look closely at any deck fittings added after the build. On the M44, (and most other Moodys up to that model) the chainplates go through slots in the deck which are sealed with little stainless steel plates screwed down around them. After some years, the sealant under these plates breaks down allowing deck water to leak through onto the part bulkheads to which the chainplates are bolted. In most cases, the owners are wise to it and rebed the plates every so often, but where this is not done, the part bulkhead (hidden by the lovely cabinetry below)rots and, in a few cases, has failed. Unexplained slacking of the rig or, worse still, cracks in the deck around the chainplates, are symptoms of this. The M42 has a completely different chainplate arrangement, not prone to this issue as far as I know.

    One last point. For passage making, I've always favoured a yacht where you can access the chart table the galley and the heads from the cockpit without dripping your way through the saloon or sleeping cabins. As I recall, the M42 doesn't permit that, whereas the M44 does.

    Happy boat hunting,

    Peter
     
  5. Neil Eccles

    Neil Eccles Neil Eccles Executive Committee

    Messages:
    3,478
    MOA Position:
    Website Editor
    Boat name:
    CUTAWAY
    Boat type:
    Moody 42
    Cruising area:
    West Coast of France and North Coast Of Spain
    Hi Peter - good advice - last point not true - you may access the aft heads via the galley!!!

    :)

    Kindest

    Neil
     
  6. Peter Wright

    Peter Wright Peter Wright

    Messages:
    1,280
    Boat name:
    WILD THYME
    Boat type:
    Moody 425
    Cruising area:
    North Sea, English Channel, Biscay
    Hi Neil,

    Thanks for putting me right on that - I must have remembered wrong from all the boats we viewed. M425 has the same access route to the aft heads and (I just checked the layouts in the Moody boat archive) so does the M44. Sounds a bit odd, but it works and keeps the saloon cushions dry.

    The shift of the galley from port to starboard after the M425 would present problems for one of our regular crew, who always works out which tack we're on by the simple rule starboard when the boom's over the cooker!

    Peter
     
  7. Hi Peter, and Neil

    Thanks for this. The 44 in question has the later layout with the two settees, rather than the armchair style of the earlier design. I agree with you, this latest style is better. It also has the passage cabin adjacent to the aft cabin, which seems pretty standard, but in the bow, it has a cabin with twin bunks to starboard, plus a smaller V berth in the bow. This arrangement is not ideal for us, we certainly don't require more than two cabins, and so we would want to modify this design to make the bow cabin much larger, and remove that twin bunk arrangement. Wonder if making such a change is costly and unlikely to add any value. Might be better to find a boat with the preferred layout.

    As far as your point regarding access to the gallery and head from the companionway is concerned, this design of 44 has the galley to starboard and the chart table to port, with the aft cabin head immediately behind the galley. So access to these areas from the cockpit is feasible without traversing the saloon, and without passing through any of the sleeping cabins, this sounds like the same arrangement that Neil has on his boat, and is also what the 42 in question also offers. This arrangement seems absolutely fine for our needs.

    My main concern with either of these boats will be the combination of the condition of the boat as it is presented, its maintenance history, and the overall condition of the interior. This latter point is of particular interest to my wife, for whom an old boat in poor condition simply means an unpleasant place to spend any time at all....! The absence of a teak deck on the 44 is a big bonus, all the used boats that I have looked at so far with one exception, have required very costly renovation to the desk. The cost of this (boatyard quotations) for a 40 foot boat is in the order of £14,000 for renovation or £30,000 for replacement. Neither of these figures are not remotely appealing!

    I am interested to learn about the possible problems with water penetration that you describe, I will also ask the broker about this when I contact them tomorrow.

    Another point has occurred to me. Both of the boats that I am looking at are deep fin keeled designs, rather than shallow draft / shoal keel. Given that we will be using the River Orwell as our base, and knowing as I do the extensive and complex shallow areas in that part of the world, am I better advised to find a boat with a shoal keel?

    Thanks again.

    Graham
     
  8. Peter Sims

    Peter Sims Peter Sims

    Messages:
    241
    Boat name:
    SIRI
    Boat type:
    Moody 44
    Cruising area:
    Ionian
    Hi Graham
    Lots of good advice from Neil and Peter above and they both have practical experience of their boats.
    I bought a 1997 M44 earlier this year but will only actually get on board it next week so I'm going by memory of seeing it for 2 days in April!
    I looked at various boats including a 42, 3x44's, 46 and an older 47. The 42 and 46 were both newer than my 44 but after a very major refit in 2007 and more in 2012 the 44 was in far better condition. She had also been very lightly used over 19 years. The 42 looked surprisingly tired and the 46 had obviously led a hard life.
    Like you I wanted the saloon layout with 2 settees. I also wanted the aft cabin with dressing area rather than passage cabin. The aft cabin is very spacious as a result with a second large wardrobe and chest of drawers. I wasn't aware that they offered the option of a large forward cabin but I wanted the 2 forward cabins anyway. I think I would be wary of changing the layout due to matching the finish and getting it to look as nice as the original work.
    Unfortunately I do have teak decks, the only negative for the boat. They are in pretty good condition mainly apart from the transom steps and cockpit seats. For some reason these were all teak faced ply rather than solid teak as on the decks so wear through quite quickly. Moody Decking have the templates for all these parts and have made me solid teak replacements as fully finished panels on a thin GRP backing. All packed up and ready to go to the boat with me next week.
    It's many years since I sailed the East Coast but I think the shallow keel on whichever boat your choose would be a good move. Mine is shallow draft
    I agree totally with Peters comments above about things that need replacing after 15 years so would pay a lot of attention to that. My 44 was rerigged, new sails, new electronics, bowthruster, windlass, heater, fridge and upholstery in the last few years. Engine overhauled as well. I've seen the bills for the refit and it wasn't cheap so no wonder it looked far better than the newer 42 and 46.
    Good luck with whichever boat you go for
    Peter
     
  9. Well, here's a thing. After all this extremely helpful advice, I have now had the opportunity to talk to both brokers and to garner some more detailed information about these two boats.

    I have currently decided not to pursue the 42 any further, I do not get a good feeling about this particular yacht. The reason for this is that the high resolution photographs show significant water damage to the interior which the broker was unable (or possibly unwilling...?) to explain. It looks as though it may have flooded at some time in the past.

    The 44 on the other hand looks to be an honest but well used example, requiring refurbishment of virtually every part of the boat, which may well be something to consider but I'm not really looking for a project, I may return to the 44 if it is still available in a couple of months, at a significantly reduced price... But I do feel that there are better examples out there.

    Additionally, neither of these boats was a shallow draft keel, so not ideal for my home cruising grounds.

    The information from Peter in the post above regarding his experience in boats are buying his boat, is something that I will take on board, I.e. In particular searching for a boat in better condition out with more recent refit work already completed.

    Thanks again to all for your input, it's been an extremely interesting and helpful.

    Graham
     
  10. Peter Wright

    Peter Wright Peter Wright

    Messages:
    1,280
    Boat name:
    WILD THYME
    Boat type:
    Moody 425
    Cruising area:
    North Sea, English Channel, Biscay
    Hi Graham,

    I've been sailing the East Coast for more than 60 years and Wild Thyme is based at Suffolk Yacht Harbour. We don't find her 6 ft. (1.83m) draft a problem, my lazy navigation still assesses local ports as all tide or half tide (enter/leave anytime when tide is more than half up, regardless of springs or neaps). It was a bit trickier this summer in Holland, when we cut a groove in the mud occasionally when getting too close to some canal banks, but still not a real problem.

    Peter.