Rudder Failures

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

..
Many of the threads are good debates and that includes parts of this one however it’s a bit like debating religions. Who is really right? The answer is of course both sides...

Couldn't agree more

Originally Posted by robert sailor

.
If you own a boat that has been glued together you can make a case for glue being best and if your preference is tabbing then you can make a case for that.

Well, mine is glued and tabbed so that makes me kind of impartial about it

Originally Posted by robert sailor

.. a light racer/cruiser as Polux suggests make sense? Well like everything, that depends. If you are going to load the boat up with all the stuff cruisers like to carry with them including a heavy dink on davits, several jerry cans of fuel and diesel, tons of spares and tools and enough food for a couple of months then maybe not because the boat will have been designed for a certain amount of weight and storage and if its overloaded then it will be subjected to rigging loads it wasn’t designed for as well as the performance would suffer as it sunk on its lines. This of course can be solved by choosing a much bigger racer/cruiser but even Polux is suggesting his next boat would be in the 36-38 foot range. Maybe the best choice here is a cruiser/racer.


If on the other hand you are more of a minimalist and can travel really light then sure some of the racer cruisers might be a good option. Just keep in mind that none of these boats sail in much under 5-7 knots of wind offshore because the larger swells are constantly shaking the wind out of the sails. Yes they can sail very well in light air in places like the Med but offshore the swell is always there and it is really hard to sail in light air in those conditions.
Others, like Dockside have expressed views that a, built like a tank, heavier/medium displacement vessel makes more sense for offshore cruising as they can pack huge loads and have room to spare. If the wind is light they just simply push a button and bring in the iron jenny to cover the light airs.
Maybe the answer for many sailors is somewhere in-between, heavy enough to be well built but light enough to be able to sail in lighter winds, this could depend on where in the world you plan on sailing.
...
So what is your religion and what will you say to get me to change mine?? The answer of course is you can’t so all the great ideas and information here falls on deaf ears because all the players had their minds made up before the game started. ...

And finally and to me this is very important and that is pride of ownership. When we dingy away from our boat do we slow down for a minute and look back and admire our little ship? Do we have deep confidence in how it was put together? Are we proud to have others aboard? No matter the costs is it giving us a payback in the enjoyment we feel when we are using it.
..R

Finally a good post

Just some corrections regarding my views: I don't try to convince nobody to change their views about the type of boat they prefer. If the market offer so many types that only means that there are a huge variety in tastes regarding cruising even in what regards offshore cruising and I accept them all...providing someone does not want to "teach" me that my preferences are "wrong".

What I don't like and oppose is the kind of "monotheist" fundamentalist opinion intolerant versus other types of tastes and lifestyles, kind of "my type of boat is the right and the only type for doing it", namely to sail and cruise offshore. There are many circumnavigating and sailing extensively in all types of boats, many on new boats or very expensive boats, and if they have chosen that type for cruising extensively, being them fast big cats, heavy monohulls or light performance cruisers, they have chosen them because it was what was fit for them and the way they like to sail and cruise.

What you have said regarding Smack preferring a new Swan (probably if Swan still made small sailboats and that is not the case), would be true to all that own older sailboats and could have a new one that corresponds to the same type of cruising and sailing they do. You can be sure they exist, even if only in Europe that has a much bigger offer choice due to the must bigger demand.

Regarding me preferring in the future a smaller boat it has to do with age and easiness of sailing and when I talk about the future I talk about for a decade from now and about sailing with 70 years of age and more. It is not in my plans to cross oceans at that age so when I talk about having a smaller fast 36ft with offshore potential I am talking mostly about coastal cruising and having fun sailing and cruising, not to cross oceans.

Regarding crossing oceans, if money is not an obstacle a bigger boat is always a better option if someone sails with a crew. If solo or with just a little help the limit is set on the possibility of sailing the boat alone easily and that limit had grown hugely on the last years and today 60fter boats are designed to be sail solo handed with a lot of hydraulic and mechanical help, reliable ones, so that is not really a problem. That is true for a Swan 60 and true for an Halberg Rassy 62, the type of boat is irrelevant about that and again the choice of one over the other is a question of personal taste and life style.

Regarding the question of bonded versus tabbed it is clear that tabbing is by far the most used method and also true that more and more boats use bonding agents and that has not only to due with being cheaper. It is also true that more it will use them in the future. Regarding reliability new products offer always some risks even if studies show that they are in many ways superior but I remember that in what regards the use of bonding agents in architecture, the first building where they were used extensively in a structural way was this one:



It was built 40 years ago and the concrete bonded together with glue holds perfectly after all this time. I doubt that modern boats are designed to last more than that: They would become obsolete first.

Regarding pride of ownership you have no idea of the number of sailors that talk to me showing appreciation for my boat and curious about it. They are many each year. I suppose the same happens to you...they are just not the same type of sailorsI mean their tastes are different.

[neilpride]

Again, this is what I mean about you and others' viewpoint being so myopic. Why would I want that 41 y.o. Swan? What exactly does it give ME that my Hunter doesn't?

My Hunter doesn't have a crapload of teak I have to maintain. The Swan rates 120 (N.E. PHRF). My Hunter rates 96. My Hunter is very comfy down below - the Swan is cramped. I have a huge aft cabin with centerline berth (like your Bristol), the Swan has a couple of aft quarterberths. My Hunter is very well equipped with all kinds of niceties - the Swan isn't. My Hunter is around 20 years newer - and it will take me and my boys where we are going just fine (as long as I don't screw things up).

So, I get it that you just can't understand it - but it's a very easy decision for me

Actually i agree with this quote, why buy a fine swan for daysailing when you can do the same in a Hunter?
Even if the Swan its a fine boat for daysailing...You never see the diference until you sail a swan in the big blue in real oceanic conditions, its their territory,, along the coast is a simple boat like others ,,, its like a master piece Violin, designed by a master designer, saying that ,,the Hunter is a fine boat for your purpose, docked and sailed in weekends, even a old Columbia is a fine boat for that purpose..

When you decide to made the big jump and start to cross oceans in the Hunter is when you start to see the diferences, until that day ,, the 1989 legend its a fine no defects or complaints boat for you...

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

..
Even if the Swan its a fine boat for daysailing.....the Hunter is a fine boat for your purpose, docked and sailed in weekends..
.....

It is this kind of "fundamentalism" and biased views I am talking about. A 40ft Hunter is designed for daysailing, being docked and sailed on weekends?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by malbert73

Nicely said. And Bristols are great. I chose my Tartan over a Bristol 41 in part because I liked the interior better. But before I made that choice I looked inside each locker and at the tabbing of each bulkhead, the well thought out and bonded rudder tube, the heavily bolted autopilot ram mount secured to glassed in 1.5 inch bulkhead, and endless other construction details. Lead keels, robust bolts, etc. Same as what I saw in the Bristols. Tartan also sl more high tech with cored hull so lighter, and better on Chesapeake where we are based. Passed over many newer boats priced lower whose ultimate build quality seemed inferior. Systems typically turn over in 5-10 years, so it's really the hull and engine that need to be chosen for longterm IMHO.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

What year is your Tartan? Didn't they have a lot of problems with hulls cracking at some point?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Actually i agree with this quote, why buy a fine swan for daysailing when you can do the same in a Hunter?

Well sure, if all you're capable of is daysailing - I guess it wouldn't matter to you.

I like to go offshore myself. My Hunter is fine for that.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Obviously if Smack had the coin to buy a new Oyster or the like we wouldn’t be having this debate.

The rest of your post was very well-reasoned. I commend you.

This part, however, is ridiculous. As I've already said, there is no freakin' way I'd buy an Oyster. Nor a Bristol. Nor a Moody. Ever. I've done plenty of research to confirm this. There's nothing "wrong" with them - but I have absolutely no desire to own one.

If I was going to "drop coin" on a new monohull boat (which I would never do anyway because it is such a stupid use of money unless it's throw-away for you) it would be something like an X-Yacht 50, a Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 50DS, or maybe even a Swan, etc.

However, if I was actually going to "drop coin" for new, it would not be on a monohull at all. My next major boat purchase will definitely be a catamaran. And if it's been a particularly good couple of years - it will be a Gunboat.

You guys really need to get over your strange sense of "bluewater boat" envy. I don't want your boats.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

The rest of your post was very well-reasoned. I commend you.

This part, however, is ridiculous. As I've already said, there is no freakin' way I'd buy an Oyster. Nor a Bristol. Nor a Moody. Ever. I've done plenty of research to confirm this. There's nothing "wrong" with them - but I have absolutely no desire to own one.

If I was going to "drop coin" on a new monohull boat (which I would never do anyway because it is such a stupid use of money unless it's throw-away for you) it would be something like an X-Yacht 50, a Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 50DS, or maybe even a Swan, etc.

However, if I was actually going to "drop coin" for new, it would not be on a monohull at all. My next major boat purchase will definitely be a catamaran. And if it's been a particularly good couple of years - it will be a Gunboat.

You guys really need to get over your strange sense of "bluewater boat" envy. I don't want your boats.

No disrespect Smack but you will note I said "or the like" meaning a very expensive boat, you choose whatever. I do wonder though because the same mind that did the due diligence and decision making to buy a Hunter, ie: maximum size for minimum dollars, a real high value boat does not suddenly purchase one of the most expensive Cats available. I sort of see you in a Lagoon if you are ever able to buy one. A very nice boat as well I might add, like your Hunter a lot of boat for the money.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

No disrespect Smack but you will note I said "or the like" meaning a very expensive boat, you choose whatever. I do wonder though because the same mind that did the due diligence and decision making to buy a Hunter, ie: maximum size for minimum dollars, a real high value boat does not suddenly purchase one of the most expensive Cats available. I sort of see you in a Lagoon if you are ever able to buy one. A very nice boat as well I might add, like your Hunter a lot of boat for the money.

Well thank you for the free psychoanalysis, or fortune telling, or whatever that was. It leaves me some extra coin for my Gunboat.

Now, aren't you supposed to be going somewhere? Heh-heh.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Well thank you for the free psychoanalysis, or fortune telling, or whatever that was. It leaves me some extra coin for my Gunboat.

Now, aren't you supposed to be going somewhere? Heh-heh.

You are very welcome, I'm always happy to help folks that need it, LOL.

And yes we are going somewhere but when crossing oceans the only weather you ever get to chose is that which falls on the day you leave, so you try to make the best choice possible. It's looking like Friday morning should work OK. We had a cold front go whipping through this otherwise stable area today and my dock neighbor tells me he saw gusts to 47 knots, a gentle breeze to be sure but as the old saying goes...its better to be sitting here wishing you were out there rather than being out there wishing you were sitting here. I know you dream of crossing oceans but its not all its cracked up to be, if it wasn't for my ego I'd probably have it shipped, but we can't all do this from armchairs.

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Offshore sailing is a completely different kettle of fish as many of these boats get more wear and tear on them on a long passage than a weekend warrior would get in their lifetime of sailing. Think about it, a typical weekend sailor might get 4 hours of sailing in each weekend for 20 weeks a year and that is generous because if you miss one weekend then you need to sail 8 the next to keep pace. That amounts to 80 hours of use a year, usually in protected waters. The boats are rarely subjected to really harsh conditions because if it really starts to blow the sailors simply don’t leave the dock.
Take an offshore passage like Mexico to the Marquises, many of these boats took 25 days to make this passage so let’s see, 25x24 is 600 hours or about equal to 7 ½ years. The same number of accumulated hours to see you get to NZ and now you are up to 15 years of cycles on the boat and rig compared to the average weekend warrior.
R

Sailing from Mexico to the Marquesas may take 25 days, but it doesn't put as much wear on the boat as the Baja Bash, which is 8 days dead upwind.

The problem with glued boats is that they are less forgiving under shock loads, such as hitting a rock at hull speed. I watched the Sunsail yard repair a Bene Cyclades which had hit a rock in Turkey. The glue joints between the hull and liner had parted, and they had to put the boat back together with glass tabbing. After they were done they figured it would have been cheaper to buy a new boat.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

You are very welcome, I'm always happy to help folks that need it, LOL.

And yes we are going somewhere but when crossing oceans the only weather you ever get to chose is that which falls on the day you leave, so you try to make the best choice possible. It's looking like Friday morning should work OK. We had a cold front go whipping through this otherwise stable area today and my dock neighbor tells me he saw gusts to 47 knots, a gentle breeze to be sure but as the old saying goes...its better to be sitting here wishing you were out there rather than being out there wishing you were sitting here. I know you dream of crossing oceans but its not all its cracked up to be, if it wasn't for my ego I'd probably have it shipped, but we can't all do this from armchairs.

Sounds like you made a good call. Have a great trip. Seriously. We'll still be arguing about Plexus when you get back. Where are you headed? And what do you sail BTW?

As for the last part - actually no. You seem to be very comfortable making a lot of assumptions about things and people. You really shouldn't do that. Because thus far your NIR ("Nailed It Ratio") is very, very low.

We're going to bum around the Carib for the next few years. That's our dream. After doing several multi-day off-shore races and deliveries over the past few years, I personally have little desire to cross oceans. Sure, I might change my mind some day - but right now, no thanks.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Sailing from Mexico to the Marquesas may take 25 days, but it doesn't put as much wear on the boat as the Baja Bash, which is 8 days dead upwind.

The problem with glued boats is that they are less forgiving under shock loads, such as hitting a rock at hull speed. I watched the Sunsail yard repair a Bene Cyclades which had hit a rock in Turkey. The glue joints between the hull and liner had parted, and they had to put the boat back together with glass tabbing. After they were done they figured it would have been cheaper to buy a new boat.

Very similar to this case, Jeaneau keel damaged...
Redirect Notice

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Very similar to this case, Jeaneau keel damaged...
Redirect Notice

Yes - but the flip side of that coin is that this production boat survived a serious collision with a rock - and got her crew home safely.

The Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 42' had a nasty collision with a submerged rock when she was travelling at high speed after finishing the Three Peaks race in Scotland. The vessel sustained damage to the main stiffening web around the keel, the hull laminate around the keel, the base of the keel and the rudder.

Of course that's going to damage a boat! The much more interesting and applicable aspect of this story in relation to this thread is that she didn't fall apart and sink like she was supposed to!

And I really like this part:

The damage laminate was ground away. The bonding flanges were cut away at the base of the stiffeners to allow further inspection of the hull laminate and to insure there was no further delamination under the stiffeners themselves. It was also essential to cut away the flanges to properly glass in the stiffeners.

Go The Plexus!




No failure with the bond. Hmmm.

I'd say, score another for production boats.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Sounds like you made a good call. Have a great trip. Seriously. We'll still be arguing about Plexus when you get back. Where are you headed? And what do you sail BTW?

As for the last part - actually no. You seem to be very comfortable making a lot of assumptions about things and people. You really shouldn't do that. Because thus far your NIR ("Nailed It Ratio") is very, very low.

We're going to bum around the Carib for the next few years. That's our dream. After doing several multi-day off-shore races and deliveries over the past few years, I personally have little desire to cross oceans. Sure, I might change my mind some day - but right now, no thanks.

We have just made our way from Turkey to the Canaries and now we leave for a direct shot (love that word for sailboats) to St. Maarten in the Caribbean. Who knows might meet you there! Sounds like you have a good dream, we have never been in the Caribbean as all our sailing has been in the Pacific. It should be interesting to check it out on our way back to the Pacific..Well maybe you are smarter than I gave you credit for..crossing oceans is for the slightly confused which these days I qualify in spades.
Oh!! we sail a Hunter..

[smackdaddy]

Like.