# Transport a sailboat by land.



## eitan44 (Feb 12, 2007)

I want to transport a keel stepped sailing boat (Caliber 33) by land.
Has anybody some experience with land transport within the US? 
A company able to transport the boat without taking out the mast maybe?

Pls help.
Thanks


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

> A company able to transport the boat without taking out the mast maybe?


not a good idea if you are going more than a couple of hundred feet...


----------



## garymcg (Jun 19, 2006)

*Just had one shipped*

I just had a 35 ft. boat shipped, the broker said to figure $2.85 per mile plus 20% of the total. Turned out to be a good estimate. Of course that doesn't include haulout, loading on the truck, decommissioning, crane rental for mast unstepping, etc.

Gary


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

"Decommissioning?"


----------



## SailinJay (Dec 6, 2002)

Yes. Decommissioning is basically taking all the stuff off the boat (like standing and running rigging, and the boom, for example) that was put on it when it was commissioned. That would include unstepping and stowing the mast.


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

When I had my boat shipped about 700 miles it cost $2800.00 plus tolls, both ways ! They had to remove the bow spirt because it wouldn't fit under the overpasses.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

Max height for anything carried on the trailer is 13.5 feet.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

eitan44 said:


> I want to transport a keel stepped sailing boat (Caliber 33) by land.
> Has anybody some experience with land transport within the US?
> A company able to transport the boat without taking out the mast maybe?
> 
> ...


Exactly how is the boat supposed to get under bridges, overpasses and power lines if the mast is still up? A Caliber 33 probably has a 38-40' mast, and very few roads have a vertical clearance of 50'+ for their entire length.

Brownell and several others can transport your boat for you, and you can e-mail or call them for price quotes. Being flexible on the pickup/delivery dates can often save you some money on the transport... You will probably need to pay for escort vehicles as your boat probably qualifies as a wide load in most states.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

sailingfool said:


> Max height for anything carried on the trailer is 13.5 feet.


Not true... but 13.5' is important since that is the minimum height required without a posted sign by the Interstate Highway System. Bridges and tunnels with a clearance less than 13.5' have to have a sign posted stating the maximum clearance. You can have taller loads on a trailer, but you have to be much more careful about where you travel.


----------



## Alden68 (Mar 21, 2007)

I trucked a 32 foot boat from Dana Point California to Newburyport Massachusetts for $4,600 plus the crane haul out etc. That is about as far as you can drive going across the US so you can figure on your haul falling somewhere under that figure. Yachtworld.com has great links to transporters.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

sailingdog said:


> Not true... but 13.5' is important since that is the minimum height required without a posted sign by the Interstate Highway System. Bridges and tunnels with a clearance less than 13.5' have to have a sign posted stating the maximum clearance. You can have taller loads on a trailer, but you have to be much more careful about where you travel.


ummm... I think the standard height though is 14', not to say that they aren't usually higher...we can look it up if it's important...(I am also a retired CDL instructor)


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

... You will probably need to pay for escort vehicles as your boat probably qualifies as a wide load in most states.[/QUOTE]

Anything over 8.5 feet wide...


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

You can transport the boat with the mast in place, but that's gonna mean you use a SkyCrane instead of a truck. Something like $1500? $2000? per hour in flight, from base to return base. Plus rigging time to rig the hoist.

But, if you really don't want to take the mast out like everyone else does...that's your option.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Ok, it's 14' for rural roads and 16' for interstates


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

The "wide load" limits vary in each state, the federal interstate limits aren't the only ones to beware of.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Ah..here, this explains it all...

Not so long ago in simpler days, the maximum width for all vehicles on 
all roads in the USA was 8 feet (96 inches.) If a truck was hauling a 
load wider than that, it required a special permit, and sometimes an 
escort vehicle. Then a few years ago the federal government passed a law 
mandating the maximum width for all vehicles on Interstate highways at 
8.5 feet (102 inches.) Gradually, states began to "designate" certain 
other roads as legal for 102-inch vehicles, until today nearly all 
states permit them on at least some of their four-lane and even two-lane 
roads. The trucking industry saw this as an opportunity to haul bigger 
loads in wider trucks. According to Utility, a major truck trailer 
manufacturer, orders for new 102-inch wide truck trailers now account 
for over 90% of their business. Buses, even local transit buses and 
school buses, are now being built on the 102-inch platform.

The RV industry, too, jumped in with both feet. At first, a few began 
showing up at RV shows, and when they did, they came with considerable 
fanfare with huge banners advertising: "New Wide Body!" The extra width 
makes for some really interesting floor plans, including forward-facing 
couches giving passengers in a motorhome a view of the road through the 
windshield. If you were to visit an RV show today you might have trouble 
finding a 96-inch wide unit, even if you wanted one. I would bet that 
90% of people buying an RV (or renting one) don't even know how wide it 
is, and they never question which roads they can or cannot drive.

The federal law only governs Interstate highways, but also mandates that 
wide vehicles must have "reasonable access" to the Interstate highways. 
That means that it is legal to exit the Interstate highways, and drive 
on local roads for a mile or two. In Maryland, it's not to exceed one 
mile, by the shortest distance possible. In Louisiana, a 102-wide 
vehicle has "reasonable access, not to exceed ten (10) miles, from 
designated highways or the Interstate System, to be allowed to 
facilities for food, fuel, repairs, and rest, unless otherwise prohibited."

But what if you wanted to drive your 102-inch wide rig from coast to 
coast on US 30 or US 50? In many of the states along the way, it may or 
may not be legal, depending on the width of the pavement.

Who sets the rules?

The state agency which governs this is usually the Department of 
Transportation (DOT.) Here's the deal in Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, 
D.C., Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, 
Michigan, North Carolina, and West Virginia: "102 inch permitted on 
Interstates and designated routes only. 96 inch limit on all other 
roads." (Roads which would not be "designated routes" in these states 
are generally roads with "lane widths of under 12 feet.")

In New Jersey, copy that except replace "under 12 feet" with "under 11 
feet."

In New York and Pennsylvania, replace "under 12 feet" with "under 10 
feet." In Oklahoma, replace "lane width of under 12 feet" with "surface 
width of under 20 feet." (Which is essentially the same as lane width of 
10 feet.) I wish they could all be a straightforward as Nebraska: "96 
inches where posted."

Massachusetts and New Hampshire are the toughest, permitting 102" on 
Interstates only. On all other roads the limit is 102" but including all 
safety equipment (mirrors, for example.) If the body of your rig is 102 
inches, then the total width with mirrors makes it unlawful to drive 
except on Interstates.

It should be no surprise that the toughest laws are in the East, where 
many roadways were laid out 200 years ago. You may have noticed that 
with the exception of Arizona, all of the Western states permit 102" 
wide vehicles on all roads. Hawaii permits vehicles of 108" on all 
roads, the widest of any state.

In Louisiana, buses are specifically exempted, permitting them to be 
102" wide on all roads. But I couldn't find ANY states which have an 
exception for recreational vehicles.

But wait - it gets more confusing. I contacted the Florida Department of 
Transportation, who told me that the DOT has jurisdiction only on 
highways maintained by the state; saying, "There are no roads on the 
[Florida] state highway system that have lanes less than 11 feet wide. 
RVs with 102-inch bodies do not need an 'oversized vehicle' permit to 
travel on those roads." So that's good news, right? Except the Florida 
DOT continues, "You will need to contact the individual counties to 
obtain lane widths and applicable restrictions for roads in their 
jurisdictions." In other words, 102-inch wide vehicles are permitted on 
all US-numbered highways and all state-numbered highways in Florida, but 
not necessarily all county roads.

I contacted the DOT in all the restricted states asking for input for 
this article. A few responded with similar opinions - it's highly 
unusual to have a state highway with lanes less than 12 feet wide.

All of the states assured me that RVs ARE REQUIRED to follow the same 
rules as trucks! Maryland sent me a booklet listing all the "designated" 
wide body routes. In the entire state of Maryland, there are only a 
dozen or so two-lane routes where wide bodies ARE permitted!

So how are you going to know which highways have lanes of less than 12 
feet? Will you take out your tape measure? I think not! And how come we 
have never heard of a RVer being stopped by police, who measured the 
width of his rig, and wrote out a ticket? Since RVs don't stop at weigh 
stations as trucks do, it is unlikely that an RVer will ever be ticketed 
for unlawfully driving on a narrow road. His problems will begin only 
after he's involved in a collision, and it is determined that the 
unlawful width contributed to the accident.

What's the big deal, you are asking? 102 wide is only 6 inches more than 
96. That's 3 inches more on the shoulder side, and 3 inches more on the 
centerline side. All I need to do is drive 3 inches closer to the 
shoulder, and I'm not in any more danger of a head-on crash than I would 
be with a 96-wide vehicle. True, until you approach one of those old 
narrow steel bridges. What if two vehicles meet on a narrow bridge, and 
both are 102 inches wide? You can't pull over 3 inches; you'd hit the 
guardrail. Between the two of you, you are now a full 12 inches wider 
than the vehicles the bridge was designed to handle. Now, take a 
102-inch vehicle and hang 4 inches of awning to the right, and maybe a 
folding boat on the left, and you may be tempting a disaster!

And that's a fact, Jack


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

When I was bringing my boat up from Annapolis, I was told by a friend it was 13' 6". My boat on the trailer is 8' 6" wide when the amas are folded completely, since it was designed to be street legal trailerable without permits in most states.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

SD-
I think 13'6" is the Interstate and Defense Highway System minimum clearance, designed to accomodate a main battle tank on a transporter. Anything not built with IDHS funds, or built very late in the system, may not have that much clearance.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Vertical clearance. Minimum vertical clearance under overhead structures (including over the paved shoulders) of 16 ft (4.9 m) in rural areas and 14 ft (4.3 m) in urban areas, with allowance for extra layers of pavement. Through urban areas at least one routing should have 16 ft (4.9 m) clearances. Sign supports and pedestrian overpasses must be at least 17 ft (5.1 m) above the road, except on urban routes with lesser clearance, where they should be at least 1 ft (0.3 m) higher than other objects. Vertical clearance on through truss bridges is to be at least 17 ft (5.1 m).


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Standards for Interstate Highways in the United States are defined by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in the publication A Policy on Design Standards - Interstate System. For a certain highway to be considered an Interstate, it must meet these construction requirements or obtain a waiver from the Federal Highway Administration.


----------



## christyleigh (Dec 17, 2001)

Alden68 said:


> I trucked a 32 foot boat from Dana Point California to Newburyport Massachusetts for $4,600 plus the crane haul out etc. That is about as far as you can drive going across the US so you can figure on your haul falling somewhere under that figure. Yachtworld.com has great links to transporters.


It's the - plus the crane haul out ect..$..$..$..$..$..$...... that gets ya  It cost me well over $5,000 to have Brownell transport my c320 from Mass to Maryland for trade in, and I put in a full day of setup in at their lot in Mass


----------



## Alden68 (Mar 21, 2007)

Exactly....its the cost of the haul plus, yup...break out another thousand!


----------



## Rodz47 (Apr 2, 2006)

I have just received a quotation for approximate 800miles trip to move 36 footer for $2700.00 plus other usual charges at both ends. You have to shop around to find acceptable deal.


----------

