Would you buy a boat that you knew has sunk in the past?

[Cheechako]

I probably wouldn't, but if I considered it I would have the surveyor probe every plywood panel, and other timber floors etc with an awl for rot,
I would assume the wiring has to all be replaced,
I would have a mechanic check out the engine extensively.
I would look for obvious signs like engine exterior parts rusting badly.

[Scout 30]

Everyone seems to think saltwater hurts wood when the opposite is actually true. If it's a good quality boat as reported then any plywood would be marine grade which means waterproof glue. If the bulkheads look OK then they are OK. They're not going to rot away because they got soaked in a wood preservative. Of course the wiring would be another story.

[Cheechako]

Yeah, Salt water is good for some wood for sure. I think the issue with ply is the swelling from being wet, it wicks in water pretty well, even if the glue is waterproof.

[MarkSF]

Originally Posted by Scout 30

Everyone seems to think saltwater hurts wood when the opposite is actually true. If it's a good quality boat as reported then any plywood would be marine grade which means waterproof glue. If the bulkheads look OK then they are OK. They're not going to rot away because they got soaked in a wood preservative. Of course the wiring would be another story.

I had one area where a Bruynzeel marine teak plywood bulkhead (the gold standard of marine ply) was getting wet at the base, wicking up moisture. The teak veneer was fine, the glue was fine, but the wood making up the plies had rotted away. This took a long time though, several years of regular soakings.

Marine ply is water resistant, not water proof. It takes a long time to be damaged, for sure, but the suggestion that salt water is going to preserve it is nonsense, quite frankly. So is the suggestion that if a bulkhead looks fine, it is fine inside.

[Steadman Uhlich]

An interesting question.

I had seen that boat listed, but don't recall any mention in the listing of "salvage" or even sinking. Looks like an example of "Caveat Emptor!"
____________

I look at incidents like sinkings as a way of learning what can happen (possible risks and outcomes) and what is done to recover or survive.

Being curious, I looked at the linked blog. First thing I noticed was that the photos on the blog show a different person (owner, man) from the photos on the sale listing.

Secondly, I was prepared to see a boat with a grounding. Those are common enough. But, the photos of THIS boat's grounding looked more like a mostly submerged boat! In other words, I was surprised at the extent of the boat submergence (it was almost all the way under, with water up to the cabin top). That is a bit different from "took on some water due to grounding" that I expected to see. You should see the photos.

It was an unfortunate (aren't they all) sinking, as the couple who owned the boat, when it sank, had just begun their big adventure, with their relatively new-to-them boat.

According to that owner, they were lucky to sink while on the sand bar (so it did not go under fully) and within 1/2 mile of the USCG station and several marine services (who brought dewatering pumps within a few minutes to the sinking boat).

Looking at the blog of the owners who owned Primrose when it sank, I found this quote interesting too: "She was purchased by a salvager from the insurance company for $650. Wow sounds low but 2 deisel engines, 2 refrigerators, 1 freezer, 2 air conditioners, electronics, miles of electrical wire, water damaged wood work, foam cushions, mattress, fiberglass repair, new skeg and more…."

In that quoted statement, he is addressing why he did not elect to purchase the boat when offered it by the insurance company, after his claim had been paid off. He also noted that he learned a lesson because while the boat was fully insured, it did not cover his recent improvements to the boat.

Another thing I found interesting was the cause of the sinking. From the blog posting, apparently the boat grounded on a sand bar near the ICW. The owner tried to back the boat off (and got about a half boat length) when the rudder hit something and tore off the skeg from the hull, creating a rapid rush of water ingress.

Here is a quote from the blog: "The Halifax River (ICW) meets Ponce Inlet near Daytona Beach. The channel is marked but shoaled in by an uncharted sand bar at low tide. Primrose went aground in the channel at day marker red 18 then while backing off hit her rudder. The result: skeg torn off leaving a hole in the boat. She took on water till her decks were awash. Crews with pumps and a diver stopped the water enough to tow her to a nearby boat yard."

Here is a photo of the boat while grounded. Looking at the aerial photos (shown on the blog), the location does not look threatening in any way. So, the hidden (and shifting) sandbar is not apparent from the air or even the water level views.

[wugwa]

To any boat builder that's worth his/her salt "SEAWATER" is a lumber/timber preservative. Any body with a wood hull will have some sea water slopping around in the bilge. Its preserves the wood.

I see no real problem with any hull that has been sunk for a period of time. Those things that are not designed to be immersed must be replaced after salvage. Timbers should be inspected and it does not need to be a surveyor, for both wet and dry rot under a time regime but this is a given any way with any hull.

As long as the hull has not been physical overstressed by dropping some distance onto a non soft sea bottom, where is the problem if she sank gently. The modern hull materials of fiberglass, steel, aluminum, are OK with sea water. It would be very bad design if they went all funny at sea and the boat got water inside. That would really "shiver me timbers."

Personal choice I am afraid. If price has been adjusted to show a value$$$ change well that is one solution. There is no perfect answer.

[Scout 30]

Wow, that didn't take long. Here's some more nonsense: salt is a preservative. For hundreds of years salt has been used in wooden boats to preserve wood. And water does not rot wood, wood destroying organisms rot wood. WDOs are attracted to damp wood so over time they can lead to rot but salt deters them. Getting the wood wet once in a sinking & then letting dry out would not attract WDOs.

[lesterbutch]

Emphatically NO! From a former boat builder.

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by MarkSF

I had one area where a Bruynzeel marine teak plywood bulkhead (the gold standard of marine ply) was getting wet at the base, wicking up moisture. The teak veneer was fine, the glue was fine, but the wood making up the plies had rotted away. This took a long time though, several years of regular soakings.

Marine ply is water resistant, not water proof. It takes a long time to be damaged, for sure, but the suggestion that salt water is going to preserve it is nonsense, quite frankly. So is the suggestion that if a bulkhead looks fine, it is fine inside.

I parked a trailer in my yard and put a scrap ~1 sq ft of bruynzeel thick ply under the jack stand. It was somewhere between 3/4 and 1" thick. metric I imagine. Anyway, by the following spring it was garbage, swelled and delaminating in spots.


If ply furniture and bulkheads are laminated to the hull, there's a perfect reservoir of glass enclosure to hold water , keeping it from drying out, and eventually rotting the wood.

[wugwa]

Ooooooooooooooooooooooowh me hearty's, tis becoming a point of disco.

Old sea methods v modern experiments and time be the answer methinks.

[charliehows]

why not if the price is right. Problem is, if the history of the boat is concealed (and even if it isn't), how do you estimate the right price - it's easy for a boat to slip into the negative value zone - ie where the cost of repairing it is greater than any saleable value or where you should be being paid to own it in order to bring the repair cost to $0. This is a classic 'how long is a piece of string ?' question.

[MarkSF]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

If ply furniture and bulkheads are laminated to the hull, there's a perfect reservoir of glass enclosure to hold water , keeping it from drying out, and eventually rotting the wood.

Exactly the cause of the rot problems I had.

[westsail374]

Marry in haste, repent at leisure.

[wugwa]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaah classic supply and demand economics. Price is really between buyer and seller with the market always trailing behind. If both parties agree then its OK. If it ain't=No sale.

Subjective and personal choice. Ceteris Paribus.

[Transporter2112]

Well, now we have some numbers to go with the discussion. So, hypothetically the savager bought the boat from the insurance company for $650. According to the listing it has:
The engine is new, that is, an exchange engine with 10 hours

The windlass has been renovated

There are 80 m chain 2 anchors

There is pressurized water, with a new pump

There is a Simrad auto pilot

Starter and Alternator is new

1 new,, Start battery,, 4,, consumption Batteries 2 for windlass

GPS-chartplotter-eccolod is new

The sails are in good condition

There is an Avon Inflatable hard bottom 10 hp evinrude

vhf

Stereo new

Mostly new cushions in saloon

New Bimini and boat cover

Most electricity is new

All old cables, old equipment has been removed

a new refrigerator.

Now he's asking $49,000 OBO. In my original post I stated that the boat is selling for half its market value and some people shuddered at that saying things like "don't be a bottom feeder" "its a buyers market" "with all the used boats out there....."

Moody's seem to be a well respected boat, and there's a sister ship listed on yachtworld for $88,000 and most of the Moody's are well over $100k. So in this scenario you could probably purchase the boat for half what it would sell for otherwise, and probably half what a comparably respected mid 40 foot deck saloon would sell for. Sure, you can get a Lancer 44 in this price range, but not many offshore sailors would call a Lancer 44 a "Bluewater" boat.