[In Part 1 Colin provided general advice on how to decide if a refit of this magnitude is a path each of us should tread, and some preliminary things to settle before we even look for a boat.
So now that we have decided to focus on boats that have been well taken care of and not butchered by inept amateurs, we still need to be realistic about potential flaws in materials and construction.
To that end, Colin turns his attention to seven construction areas where problems can turn a refit into a horror show we definitely don’t want to star in.
Over to Colin.]
None of these problems might have caused any concerns in the early years of the boat’s life, but now (at say, 30-40 years of age) will all have to be rigorously inspected and, if necessary, repaired or replaced.
Many simply can’t be judged until in-depth examination has been carried out, but there are often tell-tale signs that can give you a fair idea of what you are up against.
Let’s take a look these areas in detail:
Thanks for the hard won information and caveats, Colin. How often have you found a sailboat listing that gives any description of work performed on deck fittings, rebedding, etc? It seems be a very overlooked part of boat maintenance, yet very important to a boat’s assessment of condition in a sale.
Hi Marc
a simple answer here would be few. I guess that the boat either has to pique your interest enough to make contact and ask.
Something you’ll often see is a boat advertised that has ‘just returned from a circumnavigation’ as if that was some form of endorsement of its condition. Maybe it does – that either the boat has had a re-fit since returning or needs one! I’m not suggesting that major damage has occurred or the boat might not be worth consideration, just that it will need some attention after such an arduous voyage. Has it had it, and if not, does the price reflect that need?
Hi Colin,
I couldn’t agree more. If it were me, I would be a lot more interested in the boat sitting in the corner of the marina that has never been anywhere, owned by the guy who just likes to putter on her, than the recent circumnavigator: https://www.morganscloud.com/2015/01/03/the-three-biggest-lies-yacht-brokers-tell/
Hi Marc,
I have a paper maintenance log which covers all regular maintenance, large and small, and all projects/repairs etc. A friend/broker saw it at one time and commented offhand on how valuable these 15+ years of logs will be when we sell the boat. It is not why I devised this, but you are right to want to know history.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Colin:
Great job of convincing any newby boat dreamer that he should never consider buying a used boat! LOL Reality is a bitch. But the other side of reality is that most new boats are so poorly designed for going to sea rather than partying in the BVI’s that they may be a worse choice that a mid-80.s boat that somebody has cared for. And cost three times as much and depreciate five times as fast!
And finally, perfection is the enemy of casting off from the dock. I’ve been around enough early Valiant 40’s (rented the same factory after they left the PNW) to consider them well built boats. Poorly designed hatches, stanchions semi-bedded over balsa core, inadequate insulation in the iceboxes, welded and undersized chainplates with a history of failure, lack of sufficient crown in the cabin top that makes the headroom feel constricted, and uncomfortable cockpit seating. To say nothing of the famous blisters that took the original company down. Yet many have circumnavigated and provided long term cruising homes. A great hull design like the V40 can make you forget the pimples and focus on the horizon instead of accumulating $800,000 for the perfect boat.
Hi Richard,
We have written about exactly that: https://www.morganscloud.com/2019/09/20/buying-a-cruising-boat-five-tips-for-the-half-assed-option/
Hi Richard
I agree that many of the older boats of the type we’re discussing would be my choice, long before I’d even consider a lot of recently built boats. Boats were generally more robustly constructed back then. And I’ve deliberately painted a grim scenario, but equally I suspect that you and I have seen and worked on worse! A basically sound boat with the right attributes, solidly built and well equipped, even with a long list of work (as above) may well be worth taking on as long as you have the time, (some) money, energy and the willingness to roll your sleeves up and dig in to the work yourself. Starting with the right boat is essential, but it is still a valid, viable way to get out there.
Hi Colin
Great article which should save a lot of people both heartache and money. Corrosion of stainless chainplates where they pass through the deck has been covered elsewhere on AAC, but replacing them with new is neither difficult nor very expensive. Repairing any consequent water damage to the core not so. Another potential problem is where deck hatches with radiused corners have been fitted in an aperture with right-angled corners. Finally, removing and replacing glued-on but rotten headlining is a terrible job, and one I would not repeat. The glue + rotten foam mixture is almost impossible to remove!
For europe-based buyers looking for this type of boat, the Baltic is a good place to look. The majority of boats remain in the Baltic, have a short season, and are stored under cover during the winter. Owners often spend more time polishing and fettling than sailing. No criticism intended, I enjoy a bit of fettling myself.
Regards
Bill
Hi Bill,
Just working on a budget post. To that end do you have a rough idea of what the new chain plates etc for your Rustler cost? Feel free to email me if you don’t want to make that public: https://www.morganscloud.com/members-priority-contact/
Hi John
I actually replaced my stainless with NiAl Bronze which worked out pretty expensive. I’ll look out the actual costs in my invoice file, but I doubt anyone else would be nuts enough to follow my example. Unfortunately I can’t give an exact figure for replacement stainless plates. I phoned Rustlers and asked what they would cost. From memory they were about £70 each for 6 chainplates. I would guess that they would have been supplied as blanks, so there would have been additional work or costs for drilling the boltholes. The Rustler 36 chainplates do have the great advantage that they are straightforward steel bars, and subject to a little carpentry, all the bulkheads are accessible. So, my experience is probably not very relevant. As Colin points out, some chainplate systems are much more complicated, and if the boats are no longer in production, the costs of fabrication might rule out replacement. I also wonder whether Colin’s point about the 3-in-1 type of chainplate shouldn’t rule out any boat which has them, unless replacements are economically available?
Yours aye,
Bill
Hi Bill,
That’s very helpful, thanks.
Hi Bill
Back in the day when I built my Cape George 36 I had Newfound Metals cast every bit of hardware from silicone bronze. All I needed to do was give them a wooden plug for the item I wanted. So there was no SS in the boat except for the rigging. Not only did I have forever hardware, but it was cheaper than Stainless Steel at the time. Now NM has their port lights and other items built in China, but there are still small bronze foundries around in the US if you look hard enough.
I believe there is a chainplate specialist on the East Coast that produces titanium chainplates to order. I think Andy from 59 North had some experience with them. Might be worth tracking down—.
Hi Bill
I generally agree that replacing chainplates is easier than it used to be, but with the caveat that not all builders used the simple (and in my view) preferable fore and aft lowers with separate cap shroud chainplates. Some of the builders (e.g Gib’Sea) used single chainplates with all of the shrouds lead to them. These would take some costly fabrication. It also goes without saying that they need careful inspection (above all others) as a failure could have catastrophic consequences.
With headlining, I have tended to use the old ones simply as templates for new ply rather than deal with the gummy stuff, especially where there was foam involved!
Good point re the Baltic – thanks for that.
Best wishes
Colin
Hi Colin
Second only to teak decks on fiberglass or metal boats as Inventions Of The Devil is the fake dog hair production builders love to glue onto the insides of hulls and overheads.
Hi Dick
Your method of bedding and attaching chainplates (and every other item) to decks should be in the Bible that everyone who designs boats or works on them should be required to memorize word by word!
Hi Colin
Since we are discussing all the ways that chainplates have been attached to fiberglass and composite hulls in the wrong way, it behooves us to mention the right way!
My friend Kurt Hughes has been designing them this way for 20 years.
“Composite Chainplates
December 17, 2019 Kurt
I recently had to review a chainplate on one of my COI cats and send a note to the USCG.
I see from the X-Ray report that the Aolani chainplates were not steel, but composite as I thought they were.
These composite plates are immune to corrosion, unlike metal ones.
I assume the builder used my layup schedule as I have sent earlier. I see no reason to doubt that.
They are easy for the builders to build in a huge safety factor.
Instead of being fastened onto a hull, these synergistically combine to both strengthen the hull and the chainplate.
Unlike the metal plates, these have some resiliency so make all the parts longer lived.
Any delta in the parts from the loads would show up immediately and early by cracks in the paint. Unlike metal plates which usually are not painted.
Attached find a picture of one of my other catamaran designs with composite chainplates. Note that he lifts his entire vessel with only the three chainplate locations.”
If readers want to see a photo of the 45′ x 228′ catamaran hanging from her chainplates go to” http://multihullblog.com/
ps” I assume these chainplates are fabricated from unidirectional glass, as there is no need to restrict the volume of material down to that for which carbons’ additional strength would be required. Therefore the materials cost of the chainplates is less than almost any metal design.
Hi Richard
fascinating and true. On cats where weight is a constant concern and greater complexity is an accepted part of the build process, it’s no surprise that composite chainplates might be used. For production GRP monohulls where weight is less of an issue and low cost is also a factor, as we know, stainless rules. And conservative boat buyers like stainless because, well, it’s shiny and everyone uses it, so it must be good, right? But as is well understood away from the Boat Show, stainless, while in many ways a good material, does have its weaknesses, crevice corrosion to name the major one.
Interesting point he makes about the relative cost – surely some other builders must be aware of this by now?
And, if my memory serves me correctly, I think I first saw composite chainplates being employed on a John Shuttleworth semi-custom cruising cat back in the 1980’s…..One day maybe the message will get through.
Hi Colin:
One of my all time favorite designs is the Shuttleworth Tecktron 50 (Originally called Neptunes Car) from that era. Pure sex appeal. I saw her in Bequia when she was being operated by a French skipper as a transatlantic sail training vessel. I don’t think you could get non-French customers from the US to pay to cross the Atlantic on an open bridge deck catamaran though—-.
If you really don’t like the idea of sailing with a big stick overhead that is fastened to the boat with a material like stainless steel with a proven failure mode, here is a source that will build almost any style of chainplate out of naval bronze. https://www.porttownsendfoundry.com/chainplates
Hi all,
I have an article on replacing chainplates which has been on my back-burner for awhile. I consider this method to make leaks in this area far less likely and the re-bedding much farther spread out in time and (dare I say it) maybe not ever necessary again.
In short, it involves making a plinth of fiberglass that encircles the chainplate and gets epoxied to the deck (precluding standing water in the area of the chainplate). The other key component is butyl rubber making a very long-lasting (dare I say permanent) seal that withstands chainplate movement and stays pliable: never hardens.
Some of my chainplates bedded this way now have 6-7 years and many miles without a problem.
More details if there is interest.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick
sounds like a well-conceived method. Standing water around chainplates, is definitely to be avoided as it generally finds its way in eventually, especially where U bolts have been employed as rigging attachments – an old favourite that always gives trouble. And butyl rubber makes sense, too, especially if there is any risk of movement. Either of your options would be OK on their own, but taken together might work very well indeed, so a great idea.
Best wishes
Colin