Sharkis do have a great use of space. Which model depends on what you want to do and what you can find. As they are old boats now the condition and history is important. I would much rather have a nice Sharki than a poorly kept Maramu. But for carrying capacity, rough weather comfort and long distance sailing I would rather have the bigger one. For economy of maintenance and staying in marinas the smaller one has advantages, especially for just a couple.
The water tight bulkheads are very good. The same clever ideas are there on the different models.
Also, if only Amel were kind enough to still make a smaller boat ......
One of our friends made a 12-year circumnavigation with his family on a Sharki, which he's kept, since, in anticipation of his upcoming retirement years.
We've sailed a different Sharki and we liked it a lot.
Was impressed with the Amel 46... then I took a quick peek at the Sharki. Lo and behold it seems to be the same boat just minus 6 ft.
Is this a valid assumption?.... and are there any small differences that would make the shorter sharki less of a capable passagemaking vessel? - At face value, both seem to of equal merit.
Additionally, are those factory watertight bulkheads all they are said to be??? - what a factory feature! Big reason for my admiration among all the other commonsense attributes.
