Opinions on '73 38 Bertram Widebody?

adams · Post by **adams** » Oct 30th, '10, 12:22

Anyone have any experience on this platform? How is the ride at speed, troll, and drift? Anything in particular to look out for in respect to this model? Any input and information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

jspiezio · Post by **jspiezio** » Oct 30th, '10, 12:32

My only negative memory of our 38 with the flybridge was the extreme roll when drifting. A RBDT, if you will. Running in any sea, even beam on she was very very solid.

In Memory Walter K · Post by **In Memory Walter K** » Oct 30th, '10, 20:21

Is this the original 38 (blue and white) with the B-31 style hull? If so, it's an indestructible tank I wish they had built more of.

Tommy · Post by **Tommy** » Oct 30th, '10, 21:33

Walter,

That's correct; Bertram came out with the 38' deep V hull (proportioned similar to the 31 hull) in the early/mid '60s with a 14'5" beam. Then in 1970 they continued to manufacture the same hull, but with a better proportioned house and flybridge and continued that model through the 1975 model year, then retired the hull. A few years later they introduced a new 38' model with a narrower beam (13' 3"). Ever since the intro of the less beamy 38 footer, the models through 1975 have been referred to as "widebody" 38s. You are also correct that they are tank-strong like the 31s.

adams · Post by **adams** » Oct 31st, '10, 04:26

Thanks for the replies. I am glad to hear they are well built. From what I have found out Tommy is absolutely correct. The '70 to '75 uses the original 38 hull which is a stretched 31. It also is wider than the later 38s which is why it is commonly refered to as a widebody. Anyone else have any experience on this model? I am curious to know how it handles, and if it has any weird quirks. Thanks again.

Bill Mckinnon · Post by **Bill Mckinnon** » Oct 31st, '10, 08:07

The widebody is a great ride. Have fished on one many times and if i didn't have 31 now I would have the 38 as my second choice. It is indestructablle like the 31. With the orginal engines were slow but if has been repowered a great ride

Capt Bill McKinnon

adams · Post by **adams** » Oct 31st, '10, 09:00

Capt Bill the boat has been refitted with '92 400hp cummins 6cta's. One engine had a major overhaul (not sure what exactly) in Aug and the other one is at 1750 hours (probably will need work soon if the other just had it, but don't know). Anyone know if these are good motors for this boat and if they have common problems?

Charlie J · Post by **Charlie J** » Oct 31st, '10, 09:38

1750hrs is not alot of hrs on that engine

adams · Post by **adams** » Oct 31st, '10, 10:19

I didn't think so, but then it made me question why one of the motors needed a major overhaul already. Do you know if these are good motors and if they suite the boat well? I haven't contacted the seller of the boat yet. I wanted to do some preliminary research to see if it is something I want to persue.

I joined here at the beginning of the year to learn more about the 31. If anyone remembers I am a total noob when it comes to a big boat like this. So any help in any way is greatly appreciated, and I apologize in advance for my ignorance.

In Memory Walter K · Post by **In Memory Walter K** » Oct 31st, '10, 11:09

The boat is not/should not be the problem. The engines: did you mean 6bta's? I did not think they had a 400 hp version in 1992. More Cummins knowledgeable people in our group will chime in on whether I am correct on this. Back then, there were 210's, 250's (later 270's) and I don't even think the 300's were introduced yet. These were all on the same block. The 210's were turbocharged, the 250/270's were turbocharged/aftercooled, and if I am not mistaken the 300's had a different injecter pump and injecters. If I am correct, the seller may not have 400 hp engines in that big heavy boat and those engines have been overworked for the amount of hours they have been used...thus the need for rebuilding.

adams · Post by **adams** » Oct 31st, '10, 11:22

The ad for the boat says 6cta 400hp refit in 1992. I guess they could be mistaken?

In Memory of Vicroy · Post by **In Memory of Vicroy** » Oct 31st, '10, 12:37

The ad is probably correct. They are the "6C" series, not the 6Bs....difference is the Bs are 5.9 liter in line 6s and the Cs are 8.3 liters, also in line 6....bigger displacement engines but otherwise very similar. Generally considered as good an engine as the 6Bs that many of us love. Lots of info on them on boatdiesel.com......most common cause for early hour overhauls on the 6Bs and Cs is an overheat caused by the crappy Sherwood raw water pump failures.

Get 'em checked out by an independent Cummins guy, but in my view the best engine in that class.

UV

nestorpr · Post by **nestorpr** » Oct 31st, '10, 23:38

Widebody B38 owners usually love their boats, I know quite a few and they won't trade them for anything. In last month's Powerboat & Motoryacht one owner repowered his with Volvo IPS pods and is really happy with the results. Excellent boat in my opinion.

jspiezio · Post by **jspiezio** » Nov 1st, '10, 07:26

I was absolutely referring to the newer 38 model, not the original. i did not know about the "wide body" nomenclature. You learn something new every day.

scot · Post by **scot** » Nov 1st, '10, 12:35

The Cummins 6C is a wet/replaceable liner engine, vs the dry bore block of the 6B. This makes the C MUCH easier to rebuild than a B series engine, also the engines can be rebuilt many times because no over boring is required.

In certain cases, depending on the engine room layout the C series can be rebuilt in the boat, or "in-frame".

Good engines, capable of huge amounts of hours with proper care.

bertram31.com

Opinions on '73 38 Bertram Widebody?

Opinions on '73 38 Bertram Widebody?

Widebody

Who is online