Thoughts on 1984 Ta Chiao CT 41

[Marcellus]

We are looking for these kind of sailing boats, for cruizing and living (2people) arround the Netherlands crossing the channel to UK and some day direction the Med!
We have our eyes on the model of the picture... ship made in Taiwan

Anyone knows how good these boats are? What is the production quality, sailing characteristics etc? Would you trust them to take offshore?

[nhschneider]

I have personally known of several CT41s that have had major issues with the deck core being built using plywood and the plywood delaminating and/or rotting.

Good luck.

[zeehag]

ta chiao and formosa are good offshore boats.
considering the age of these boats now, construction was good.
the y were designed to sail trade winds and do that well. they suck in light airs. they are fun in wind.

[Marcellus]

Thats great we love strong winds ����

[akprb]

First thought as I read your post.

Deck Rot.

Watch for it.

[Vino the Dog]

Depends on how well the boat was cared for. You will find a whole group of people who hate them and will tell all kinds of tales like newspaper used as core materials, put together with nails, and the silliest rumor of all that they are not seaworthy. Some of these rumors are based on the fact that most were built during the early days of fiberglass boat building when construction varied as the yards gained experience during the early 70s.

As already stated, the single biggest common problem requiring a lot of work is deck core rot and rot in the cabin construction. However the extreme cases are rare in CTs, not so rare in Formosas.

Many people can not tell the difference between a Formosa, CT, Island Trader, Transworld, or even a Mariner because they all share a a common design origin that was copied and reproduced in over 20 different brand names. Of them CT had the reputation as highest quality construction, but again, that depended on the particular boat and how well it has been maintained. Most of these boats were built in three different Taiwan yards all started by three brothers of the Chen family and all three yards are still in business.

I've done a lot of research over several years on the entire line of similar boats and part of that was trying to find out which of the rumors are true. I found that deck core rot as previously spoken by nhschneider has been common with the Formosa 41, but have yet to find any CT-41 that suffered the same problem. Formosa used teak decking commonly 3/8" thick over fiberglass and ply core. CT used full 3/4" teak over 5/8' fiberglass over 1/2" ply over another 1/4" fiberglass on the side decks and it is hell for stout. I have found no one who could provide any evidence of the popular rumor of newspapers used as core material and doubt that ever happened. Same with the rumor that decks were nailed down.

I live on a CT-41 that I restored from near derelict and all my comments are from personal experience or gathered from a collaborative research project with over 50 people with similar boats contributing their own personal experience.

They are slow and very slow below 10-15 knots of wind, but very stable in high seas and strong winds. The rumors that they are not seaworthy are totally incorrect. They were designed specifically as live aboard voyaging boats to cross oceans in relative comfort and they were built where traditional wood craftsmanship was a long heritage, hence a lot of very fine wood work, which also means a lot of continuous upkeep.

If you like coastal cruising from port to port, there are lots of other boats you will probably be happier with. If you are into racing or don't like to work on a boat, don't even consider one. If you are not in a hurry, intent on full time live aboard including long passages in the open sea, and looking for the warmth and charm of a beautiful little floating cabin, possibly you would be happy to join hundreds of people who have lived on these things for decades, crossing oceans and raising their families on the sea.

These are tiny cargo ships, not "performance boats" and all such comparisons are like comparing a sports car to a truck.

For a stream of information from people who live on them, and restore them, join FB Leaky Teaky Yacht Club group or the Formosa Owners Group (AKA Leaky Teaky Tavern)

[Cheechako]

Years vary. Deck and cabins on some are a huge problem. In the 80's that got better. many early ones were cheap asian plywood covered with glass. These seldom last. Later boats were decks and cabins done in a mold.
The hulls are thick and strong. The glass work is rough in spots. Cored decks, even in the 80's, may be a problem if there has been any water intrusion. Often that light cheap plywood was used as core. Deck fittings may allow water to seep in. Go over any boat with a fine tooth comb for sure.

[Keelcooler]

Low grade non 316L stainless everything. Tanks, chain plates, fittings and alike.
Low grade water soluble glues used in the plywoods.
Don’t even get me started on far east black iron fuel tanks.

[atmartin]

I'll second the previous remarks. I've worked on the cabins and decks of two (one CT, one Formosa). Very low quality plywood with glass over top. The bond between the plywood and fabric was poor from the start (polyester resin) and doesn't get better with time. Putting teak and screws on top of the decks doesn't help.

The interiors can be lovely. The hulls are very low-tech, but the design isn't heavily stressed (full keel, low righting moment and rig) so it doesn't much matter. Bulkhead tabbing is often poor.

Another thing to check are the rigs. I've been on several and they've all had wood spars, glued box sections. These masts can last a long time. My last boat's rig (a Mariner) was almost 50 years old, spruce box section and still sound; however maintenance is often poor and owners frequently putty and paint over the spars to hide damage.

I know this will offend some owners, but I think there are a lot of these boats around because a lot were built. They also make decent liveaboards. I've been friendly with a few owners of these boats, but never sailed on one because they don't take them out often, if ever. Based on the lines and the small rig, they must be very ponderous.

[zeehag]

some of the boats didnot come with teak decking. mine was one of those. built like a brick shithouse.
each of our/these boats is completely different. each one is very old. each one has known different maintenance schedules.
my crap stainless water tanks are still original and perfect with rewelding. amazingly still in use.
my 43 yr old mizzen which was cracked by patttybaby furycame from hell, is being rebuilt beautifully as is the mizzen step which has experienced a battery acid bath oopsy.
as mine was left on its side on the santa barbara breakwall for a week, there are some tiny issues. duh.
this boat still floats has buoyancy.
these can ground on a coral reef in tuomotos then complete the 350 mile trip to tahiti. this was recently done.
these cannot sail in light airs. period.
gimme a good chubasco of 60 kts and these are fun. these ar ships. not lil boats.
cross an ocean?? bring it on. heavy weather--hold my beer..see ye on the other side of bahia tehuantepec

these were not production boats not at all. each is different, each hand laid fg and roving. no core. there were fewer than one can imagine. i believe a total of 500 formosas were created in the years 1972-1980. probably fewer built in
the 20years of production than the number of production boats built in one year of a production boat plant.

ct and island trader and transworld are greater in numbers than were formosa.

[Vino the Dog]

Atmartin,


A lot of what you say I have also found to be true, but my experience is limited and there are a lot of contradictory statements from people with different experiences. I would like to know a little more detail about some of your findings that might help figure out which of these boats tend to what problems. There was a lot of difference between the quality of one boat from the next.


Can you answer these questions please:

“I've worked on the cabins and decks of two (one CT, one Formosa).”

What year and model of each?

“Very low quality plywood with glass over top.”

How did you determine the quality of the plywood?

“The bond between the plywood and fabric was poor from the start (polyester resin)”

How can you tell what resin was used?

“The hulls are very low-tech,”

In what way low-tech?

“Bulkhead tabbing is often poor.”

Can you explain what constitutes poor tabbing?

How extensive was the work you did on these two boats?

Looking forward to hearing more about your experience

Thanks

[Marcellus]

THANKS everybody for al the replay more negative than positive. but we look at the sunny side of the boat.. btw a picture of the boat we are looking at...

[atmartin]

Vino

What year and model of each?

I couldn't say. The Formosa I'd guess late 70s. The CT was probably newer, but the owner had put more love into her. Both had Perkins engines IIRC.

There's a guy who used to post on CF, CharlieCobra, who knows a lot more than me about these boats. I think he makes/made a business working them.

How extensive was the work you did on these two boats?

I've done small projects on several of these boats, but I got familiar with two.

On the Formosa, I scarfed in several patches on the cabin-top and house. I bid to re-do the decks, which had been "fixed" horribly by the previous owner (they simply laid another layer of plywood over the rotten decks and bondo'ed over the stanchion bases, etc. The mizzen was stepped in the cockpit and not blocked down to the hull. I epoxied a frame into the hull to brace under the mizzen and replaced some of the rotten/crushed plywood in the area. It was teak over plywood in the cockpit, as I recall. I removed the rotten ply around and rebed several opening ports.

The CT was a buddy's job last year, initially with a crew. Having been around a lot of these boats, I wanted to size her up compared to others I've been on. So I was just rubbernecking. They took her teak off, had a company template her decks (wish I could remember their name) and pre-cut/assemble the teak to be glued down on site. This boat's decks were punky, but after drying and filling all the old screw holes, then putting on the new decks (3/8") it was stiff enough to satisfy the owner. He wasn't interested in crossing oceans. Reminds me, the cleat the connected the side decks to the house (there's a name for it that escapes me) was a big problem on this boat. The owner had little troughs hanging on wire along most of it because it leaked so regularly. They also rebuilt the rotten mainmast step, in the fwd cabin. There was some rot in the sprit and a large Dutchman was let in, without removing the sprit.

How did you determine the quality of the plywood?

Very few plys is a good indicator of bad plywood. I'm not sure when good quality marine ply became commonplace, but this problem isn't unique to these boats. Lots of asian-built boats from the 70s/80s use low ply, soft mahogany plywood. I owned a Mariner, Japanese built, with the same kind of stuff in it. I have no idea where it came from, you can't buy anything like it these days.

When I sold my Mariner last year the only original plywood was the cabin sides (and they had some patches). If you're looking at one of these boats and they've been cared for, there will be extensive repairs/rebuilds of all the plywood structures. The materials are well past their service life.

How can you tell what resin was used?

Polyester resin was standard on boats of the era. I know epoxy was around in the 80s, but you'll only find it on these boats if someone has repaired them. The bond with wood sucks. I've peeled off polyester skin by hand, even on dry/unrotten areas.

In what way low-tech?

"Low-tech" in that I doubt much, if any, engineering went into them. No stringers, few, if any, frames and half-hearted bulkhead tabbing. I'm speaking in generalities here and your boat may be different; HOWEVER, every one of these boats I've inspected has, if not all of these issues, some of them. People rave about their "thick hulls", but there are much more efficient ways to impact rigidity and strength than just making the hull thicker.

No disrespect to the owners of these boats. I've been on Tayana's with the same issues and my Mariner also. They can be corrected if you love the boat, but prospective owners should be aware of the burden.

One Formosa had concrete poured in the aft-most part of the keel sump, around the (bronze?) shaft log, making it a huge pain to replace the stuffing box when the threaded part of the log sheared. I had to cold chisel the concrete back a few inches. Why did they pour a couple hundred pounds of concrete in the stern? They didn't bother to glass over it, either. I assume the boat didn't sit on her lines when launched.

"Low-tech" doesn't mean "terrible", but no matter how you feel about Bene's, J-boats, etc, they're a modern industrial product. Lots of folks will tell you that a modern 40 footer is weak because it's only 1/4" thick or whatever, but not all laminates are created equal. Higher glass to resin ratios, better resin, better cloth, cleaner working conditions (modern factory) can create a 1/4" sheet of GRP stiffer than a 1/2" sheet made in a dusty shop with boatyard resin.

Can you explain what constitutes poor tabbing?

I already talked too much, so here's an image I found on CF:



If you're checking, all of these boats (and most from that era, including American), will have the joint on the left. Whatever, probably not that big a deal. What you'll usually find though, is that the tabbing didn't actually stick to the bulkhead (or isn't sticking anymore), so you can put a putty knife in between and the bond is gone. I just varnished the sole on a Tayana and the tabbing below the sole was still sticky (meaning they didn't properly catalyze the resin). Another peeve of mine is that often the joint with the deck (wood to wood joint) isn't even cleated, just butted, what the heck?

Some of these issues are technological, because epoxy is a million times better in this secondary-bond-with-wood scenario, so it's no entirely the builder's laziness.

I hope this helps. I've no intent to insult anyone's baby, but a boat this size could be a serious project for anyone, even someone who does this for a living. I've seen too many cruising dreams crushed or hamstrung by extremely high maintenance boats.

[zeehag]

i find low tech preferable to the high tech cored hull oil canning wonders many consider boats. nope they are fail. i love sturdy and solid with deep full keel. these babies are hand laid.
i have found cement in the stern , which does impact the repairs of the stern tube and packing gland. the shaft log is external. some have bronze shaft tubes some have stainless steel.
my boat is one of the lower priced and less bling created formosas, 1976. decks are fg with a thin wood core, appears to be same thickness as doorskin. very solid decks. mine never had teak installed over the fg.
there are longitudinal as well as transverse stringers in my boat. these are appropriately placed so as to support engine, rigging, and tankage.
having checked this boat out before i acquired it, i found the tabbing of bulkheads was strong. as this hull is thick, hard spots are irrelevant. no core. foam core means hard spots cause issues.
these hulls are NOT cored, so the tabbing is appropriate.
that lil balsa bit would have caused issues due to crushing long ago had it been placed between bulkhead and hull via tab. there is some sag to my cabin sole due to the breaking of some supports while on her side on santa barbaras breakwall for a week, otherwise, all is strong and good. seems tabbing was strong enough to outlast the breakwall and some sailing after. i have found no issue with these.
before i sailed out of san diego i replaced the foredeck backing plate and forward bulkhead, each of which had delaminated in the 30 plus years of neglect by owners uninterested in maintaining this jewel. the tabbing outlasted the plywood!!
i also replaced 2 of the chainplates which appeared to have been original 1976 stainless steel.
my two water tanks are stainless, now 43 years of age, and with new welding work just fine. perfect. my original fuel tank had been removed i believe by salvor who presented this as a liveaboard back in 2001-2002 when he sold it to the previous owner.
in evaluating these boats it is important to remember the style of building has changed since these hand laid hulls were created. nowadays coring is the almighty issue. hahaha hence the desire for tabbing as has been shown with balsa buffers and prevention of hard spotting. different construct. for longevity,. nothing beats the old solid construct. balsa bits would havenot only compressed but also would have rotted creating much greater problems than anyone has described. the practices used in modern cored hull construction is much different than what was needed for these solid boats. therefore the comment about tabbing and low tech is irrelevant. these are hand laid hulls with hand made topsides.
each of these is different. there is no mass production of these.. each is an essentially custom boat. for the most part these were ordered then built for the filling of the specific orders. each is different and each is appointed differently.
and all are over 40 years old.
as i repair mine, i see the value of these. when i sailed the chubasco i learned how awesome these are in big winds. they are smoooth well balanced sailing shiplets. they donot sail well in light air. no big deal. they drift nicely.
i treat mine as if she were wood.. topsides get no rain,. hull is fg, so no problem best of both worlds.

[Vino the Dog]

Atmartin,


Thanks for the very insightful answer. I can see everything you said as true. All of those problems have happened to some these boats, but not all of them to all theboats. What you experienced was s small example, but none the less, they are all potential problems one needs to know to assess what they are considering buying.


What you describe all sounds to me more typical of Formosa. Deck and coach construction you describe is nothing like my 1975 CT-41. I could reply with more detail, but would be long and not sure others want to hear it.