Poor construction

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Polux

No, just sticking to reality in what regards what they are using and their life expectancy. They are certified to resist 5 years but nobody change them after 5 years. They should be thoroughly inspected after that each year and they should be replaced after 10 years use even if they look good even if some keep them more time. Not a complicated or very expensive work.

And what they use is DZR valves that are pretty inexpensive and appropriated to marine use even if more durable and expensive valves can be used. Some keep calling them plain brass valves because they are not bronze.
https://marinestore.co.uk/Sea_cocks_and_valves.html

I am not defending anything, just against the hysteria regarding all those new boats going down due to defective valves..... because that is not happening neither new boats are changing valves in 5 years time.

There was a member of this forum, a cat owner that new a lot about valves and DZR and he said that DZR is better than bronze for marine use. He went away never understood why, but maybe you could find his posts about the subject. He was quite informed, technically speaking.

of about 4000 boats surveyed, somewhere around 1200 were Euroboats (Beneteau, Dufour, Jeanneau, Hanse, Bavaria) Never seen one with DZR valve ..... all nickel or chrome plated brass.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

It surely makes one wonder what other, less visible shortcuts/cost savings they have employed in the boats construction. It's easy enough to change out through hulls/valves if you are worried about them, but harder to replace Plexus with glass tabbing, etc.



For me, it is a deal breaker, for many it is acceptable. Their choice!



Jim

Yes, they decided to save such a trivial amount of money on something so important, what shortcuts did they do on the rest of the boat? But hey, it is CE certified!


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

It surely makes one wonder what other, less visible shortcuts/cost savings they have employed in the boats construction. It's easy enough to change out through hulls/valves if you are worried about them, but harder to replace Plexus with glass tabbing, etc.



For me, it is a deal breaker, for many it is acceptable. Their choice!



Jim

That is it right there, when you start finding cheap stuff right out in the open, you have to wonder what about what you cannot see

[a64pilot]

I looked at several boats when we started looking, initially my cut off point was five years, I did not want an old boat that needed a lot of work. However I found them poorly constructed, glued together with that Plexus, liners so that you could not get to the hull in most places, wires and plumbing that was installed, then the boat built around them so that your never getting them out etc.
God knows I tried but I just cannot love an IKEA interior
I think most average newer boats are meant to have a short life, meant to be replaced regularly like automobiles. Think about it, they are selling boats to new owners, they do not care what shape it will be in in ten years as they will have bought another new boat by then.
Houses have gone the same way, I started looking at how poorly houses were built when we came back from Germany in the mid 90's and was astonished, and even big, expensive houses were very poorly constructed, these things will not last 50 or more years, the structure isn't there. What sells in houses and boats in big and flashy, no new boat owner or very few anyway actually look at the bones of the boat, or know how to, the new boat buyer that does likely goes to a custom manufacturer and specs out a well constructed boat

[robert sailor]

Friends of ours just had all their thru hulls changed on their newish Beneteau as they were showing signs of breaking down. It's not cheap to have this done as Polux suggests, in fact it's quite expensive.

[robert sailor]

I think high production boats offer a high value product, you get a very large boat built ok for a very good price. Just don't expect top of the line as the builders can't produce that for what they sell boats for. I used to bad mouth some of these boats but I have since decided that for the intended purposes they offer high value. They do take some short cuts, anybody producing high value products does the same thing but for the average use they do the job. I really had problems with how one builder built the rudder support systems but I think it's up to the individual buyer to educate themselves on the particular model they are interested in. We have a few members here that get their hands dirty every day fixing these boats and it's wise to listen carefully to them rather than others that regurgitate the manufacturers marketing information and have no experience actually working on these boats.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

of about 4000 boats surveyed, somewhere around 1200 were Euroboats (Beneteau, Dufour, Jeanneau, Hanse, Bavaria) Never seen one with DZR valve ..... all nickel or chrome plated brass.

(DZR Brass) is essentially a leaded arsenical brass

From"First Choice Marine Technical Group"

"...But adding a small amount of arsenic to brass increases
its resistance to corrosion in seawater and is considered to be quite acceptable for marine use.
I can confirm that Group Beneteau changed to this marine grade just over 1 year ago so although we all need to still be on our guard and watch out for early corrosion on our existing boats, the new boats from 2007 should be much better and hopefully get through at least the charter life without failure.
The new material spec is CuZn36Pb2As. That means it has 2% arsenic."

Yes, most production boats used for a long time brass, they are now (since 2007) changing to DZR that is only slightly more expensive.

And yes I agree that the text on the RCD should be rectified to make it more clear in what regard "corrosion resistance" but is also true that the fittings and seacocks used have a duration superior of the 5 required years for the simple reason that very few change them after 5 years (many more than twice that) and there are very few problems regarding that if we consider 10 years time and regular inspections.

I have checked out on several brand boat forums and that is the case even if they are pissed about the poor quality of the seacocks, that they think should last more. Save me trouble to post here dozens of examples that sustain what I am saying.

The duration can be reduced on the case of boats left full year on the water without a proper zinks substitution. Premature corrosion is associated with that.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Friends of ours just had all their thru hulls changed on their newish Beneteau as they were showing signs of breaking down. It's not cheap to have this done as Polux suggests, in fact it's quite expensive.

I guess our concept of newish is not the same. From what year is the boat?

I don't know what you call expensive. I am going to change mine this year (10 years old, no sign of corrosion and working perfectly) so I know the price and it is a lot less than what I was expecting, much cheaper also on Greece (the job) than in Italy.

[meatservo]

Polux, I respect your knowledge and opinion, you have considerably more experience than I may ever have, but this is safety/life support equipment.
There is no excuse for using this crap except for profit margin.




meatservo

[Jim Cate]

the new boats from 2007 should be much better and hopefully get through at least the charter life without failure.

"Charter life"? "Hopefully"?

My goodness, Polux, that does NOT inspire much confidence in me... they hope that their boats will not sink before they sell them on to others?

Good grief, what a lousy outlook, and all to save a tiny fraction of the cost of building the boat.

You may find that acceptable, but i do not.

Jim

[Polux]

Originally Posted by meatservo

Polux, I respect your knowledge and opinion, you have considerably more experience than I may ever have, but this is safety/life support equipment.
There is no excuse for using this crap except for profit margin.
meatservo

I never said that I agreed with the use of seacocks that have a safe use of 5 years and with proper care and vigilance a useful life of 10 years.

What I am against is the hysteria about all subject and with opinions that seacoks should be imediately substituted on a new boat because they are not safe.

Reality is what I care about and in this case it is not good and it is what it is, but it is not what some say it is.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Polux

I guess our concept of newish is not the same. From what year is the boat?

I don't know what you call expensive. I am going to change mine this year (10 years old, no sign of corrosion and working perfectly) so I know the price and it is a lot less than what I was expecting, much cheaper also on Greece (the job) than in Italy.

Newish in his case is around 7 years old...to me, that's newish. By the time he bought proper bronze fittings and proper seacocks his yard bill was pushing 3 grand. If your replacing your stuff with the cheap fittings it came with then your bill would be less. He chose to do a proper job. There are tons of boats that are 40 and 50 years old with bronze skin fittings and sea cocks and they are still like new. It's really a losing argument supporting the manufacturers using this junk, especially after the fact that they have admitted it themselves by changing the codes as you pointed out.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

"Charter life"? "Hopefully"?

My goodness, Polux, that does NOT inspire much confidence in me... they hope that their boats will not sink before they sell them on to others?

Good grief, what a lousy outlook, and all to save a tiny fraction of the cost of building the boat.

You may find that acceptable, but i do not.

Jim

Who said that I find that acceptable? I said the opposite.

The only thing I said from the start was that the seacocks that are used on mass production boats have a longer duration than the 5 years (even if they need to be properly inspected each year) and that most don't change them before 10 years and those that make the professional maintenance of those boats don't see the need to do that before.

If that was not the case, since very few change them after 5 years, we would be seeing a lot of boats going down due to seacock breakage.

A useful life of a charter boat is about 10 to 15 years, so it is according what I have said. Yes, after 10 years the boat has to change the seacoks, for sure and at 15 the rig too and that is far more expensive.

If one is going to buy a 15 year charter boat that did not have changed the seacocks and the rig, should count with that expense. Of course they will sell the boat without doing that....why do you think ex charter boats are cheap for sell?

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Polux

From First Choice Marine Technical Group ... I can confirm that Group Beneteau changed to this marine grade just over 1 year ago


and seacocks

I have no idea who "First Choice Marine Technical Group" are and can't find them online but their statement contradicts my personal experience particularly having surveyed 13 late model (2013 to 2015 Beneteau's and 8 Lagoons) all with plated brass ball valves and brass throughulls, and none of them marked DZR and I make a point of looking, every time.

"and seacocks" Lets not confuse the brass NPT throughull and NPS brass ball valves (which in it's self should be criminal) used by these builders with real "seacocks"

[Jim Cate]

A useful life of a charter boat is about 10 to 15 years,

Is that true? I thought that many charter programs cycle the boats after 5 years, especially those programs that use boats purchased by outside owners and returned to them after their charter "lives" were done. Or pass them down to "second tier" charter groups for additional usage. Do you suppose that those operators change the seacocks?

Jim