Lipari undergoing osmosis treatment vs. One that is not supposedly having osmosis

[Te81611]

]Help, would like opinions and recommendation.

We are ready to put in an offer on one out of two 41 Lipari both 2010

One is having osmosis treatment now and hulls completely taken down, below waterline through gelcoat and expoxy treatment done by F.J. people. Above waterline shows no visual sign of osmosis.
The other one is the same year but has not shown any osmosis (according to owner) this of course will not be confirmed until survey. Otherwise boats almost identical same price as well. I am completely uncertain which one to go with... thoughts please!![/QUOTE]

[neilpride]

I will take the one with the hulls peeled and the epoxy barrier coat in place, just my 2 cents, those FP sooner or later got bubles problems,,,, be sure there is no traces of blisters above the waterline ,,

[rabbi]

If the peel, dry & rebuilt with epoxy is done well I'd go with the treated one. Our Mahe has been treated some years ago by the original owner. No issues so far

Osmosis seems to be in many FP's DNA somehow, at least for certain years. Odds are the untreated one will develop Osmosis sooner or later. do you really want to deal with FP's warranty? Which by the way is not transferrabl so worthless for you

[PaulinOz]

Boats may be made in the same year, but how they have been used since purchase may effect the time frame in which a blister problem may show up. eg: stored for winter on the hard, water temperature etc etc.

FP have agreed to fix a lot of boats like this and you can only assume that boats made of similar build materials will have the same problem over time. More a case of when not If, the repaired one would give me more peace of mind but it is you that has to be satisfied with the deal in the end.

[smj]

Another FP problem?
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...2323#post72323


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Te81611]

From what we are find in out newer than 2006 tend to be notorious with this issue. Has to do with manufacturing process I assume. But if they don't stand by their product we all will stay away from them.

[tpkas]

My understanding is that the osmosis problems were due to the resins used not being of the correct viscosity and so not achieving a thorough wetting of the fibreglass. From some time in 2010 FP changed from polyester resin to vinyl ester resin to combat this problem.

We are the second owners of our Mahe and FP paid for the cost of our boats peel and re glass. It was 5 years old when they did this. In Australia there are consumer laws that offer protection from poorly manufactured goods that can exceed any manufacturers warranty. These laws consider the purchase price, the purpose the product is manufactured for and a reasonable product life. When some one pays $400,000 for a yacht it is expected to last for quite some time and not suffer from manufacturing defects.

So, you need to find out which resins were used in the build of both of the yachts and understand the consumer laws in your country. Having said that, if you believe you will have no consumer protection should osmosis develop in the unrepaired vessel, then I would negotiate a price that had an allowance for a future repair.

Brian

[rabbi]

Originally Posted by tpkas

So, you need to find out which resins were used in the build of both of the yachts and understand the consumer laws in your country. Having said that, if you believe you will have no consumer protection should osmosis develop in the unrepaired vessel, then I would negotiate a price that had an allowance for a future repair.

Wether or not one can successfuly get compensation for warranty claims is the big question. I have the feeling this mostly depends on which dealer to go through. If the dealer considers this a valid rquest, and FP thinks the dealer is important enough for them to honor his request one may be lucky.
Otherwise maybe not.

I doubt one will manage to apply australian consumer law to a french boatyard (not just FP). It will cost significant time and money and they know it.

I'd go with the treated one. I doubt one can negotiate a potential future repair into the price if the other boat doesn't show any signs yet.
Would you as a seller accept that argument to deduct some 20k?? I would not.

[mark Sobel]

Use a moisture meter to read the hull.
Be sure that you inspect any hull as it undergoes treatment and record the drying process by marking and recording moisture content. I am familiar with and highly recommend the hot vac system when used in conjunction with fg removal. Remove all fg until the hull reads dry and then hot vac. The process requires time to be effective. We doubled the barrier coat thickness in consideration of our cruising plans and cost of barrier coat relative to the expense of the entire osmosis process.

[Te81611]

I believe you are correct, boats from 2006 - 2010 seem very prone to this expensive problem.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by Te81611

I believe you are correct, Fountaine Pajot boats from 2006 - 2010 seem very prone to this expensive problem.

Fixed

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by tpkas

My understanding is that the osmosis problems were due to the resins used not being of the correct viscosity and so not achieving a thorough wetting of the fibreglass. From some time in 2010 FP changed from polyester resin to vinyl ester resin to combat this problem.

Brian

Seems incredible to me that anyone was still using polyester as late as 2010!

[neilpride]

Polyester is still used by the vast majority of builders, vinilester resins are used as the last layup barrier coat to prevent osmosis, i mean FP,s are build it based in polyester resins....

[44'cruisingcat]

Still incredible to me! I can understand not using epoxy, while it's the best resin it's much more expensive.


But the price difference between vinyl and poly isn't much. The benefits are much greater.


It illustrates my point about home-builds vs production boats though. A home builder will most likely select the better or best resin - it's his family who will be out at sea on the boat.


A production builder will be more likely to use the cheapest resin. Punters at boat shows won't be able to tell the difference, the polyester boat will be just as shiny as the one made from epoxy. But more profitable.

[smj]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Still incredible to me! I can understand not using epoxy, while it's the best resin it's much more expensive.


But the price difference between vinyl and poly isn't much. The benefits are much greater.


It illustrates my point about home-builds vs production boats though. A home builder will most likely select the better or best resin - it's his family who will be out at sea on the boat.


A production builder will be more likely to use the cheapest resin. Punters at boat shows won't be able to tell the difference, the polyester boat will be just as shiny as the one made from epoxy. But more profitable.

Taking your boat for example, what was the extra cost for you to build with epoxy rather than polyester? Probably not that significant considering the overall cost of the boat yet you gain a much better product.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum