Cheeki Rafiki loss report

[sardinebreath]

Originally Posted by Polux

It seems you are not used to use words precisely:

I don't know if that was intentional or not. But it's really funny in any case.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

but in one way or the other they say it is a flaw in the construction, like others point it here, to have Access to this kind of tooling to inspect the keel joint and structure you need to sail close to that location, you cant ask for a surveyor to fly to a remote atoll in the pacific after a serious grounding unless you are ready to spend a fortune,,,,in other words, for the vessel value is not worth it, a proper repair involve serious grinder surgery,,, nightmare to repair and inspect, then is a flaw ,,, whatever you try to argue....

I cannot find nothing about a flaw on that report. Please quote the relevant paragraph.

I don't think the building is great, I believe it could be better. You and other are exaggerating regarding the difficulties of repairing and to diagnose damage. Read my last post.

Yes that type of integral molded matrix has disadvantages and one of those is the difficulty in repairing but it has advantages too allowing a bigger surface for bonding and a bigger surface to distribute stress.

This system is used on all Beneteus and Jeanneaus for many years (15? 20?) and the difficulty to make a diagnostic and eventually repair a matrix detachement is not different than on the First 40.7.

Do Minaret means that all those Beneteaus and Jeanneaus have a defect? or a flaw as you put it?

That's a very strange statement if we consider that Beneteaus and Jeanneaus are the leader markets and that nobody would be buying repetitively those boats if they had the maintenance problems you refer at the point of being considered a defect or a flaw.

Other boats with similar prices like Bavaria, Hanse or Dufour don't use that system (an integral keel matrix) and if it was such a disadvantage (or a disadvantage at all) would be them the market leaders and not Jeanneau and Beneteau.

That integral matrix molded structure has advantages and disadvantages regarding other keel structures. The bigger difficulty of repair is one of the disadvantages.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Polux

I cannot find nothing about a flaw on that report. Please quote the relevant paragraph.

I don't think the building is great, I believe it could be better. You and other are exaggerating regarding the difficulties of repairing and to diagnose damage. Read my last post.

Yes that type of integral molded matrix has disadvantages and one of those is the difficulty in repairing but it has advantages too allowing a bigger surface for bonding and a bigger surface to distribute stress.

This system is used on all Beneteus and Jeanneaus for many years (15? 20?) and the difficulty to make a diagnostic and eventually repair a matrix detachement is not different than on the First 40.7.

Do Minaret means that all those Beneteaus and Jeanneaus have a defect? or a flaw as you put it?

That's a very strange statement if we consider that Beneteaus and Jeanneaus are the leader markets and that nobody would be buying repetitively those boats if they had the maintenance problems you refer at the point of being considered a defect or a flaw.

Other boats with similar prices like Bavaria, Hanse or Dufour don't use that system (an integral keel matrix) and if it was such a disadvantage (or a disadvantage at all) would be them the market leaders and not Jeanneau and Beneteau.

That integral matrix molded structure has advantages and disadvantages regarding other keel structures. The bigger difficulty of repair is one of the disadvantages.

At long last, some enlightenment! Turns out that most people buy boats because of their intricate knowledge of the type of matrix liner used, as opposed to how inexpensive they are, how much interior space is offered, how much seating they have for entertainment purposes, and how "fast" they go!

But maybe I just misinterpreted or misstated something . . . again. Wait for it . . . .

[transmitterdan]

Paolo,

The problem with this design is easy for anyone with eyes to see. The backing plates are at least an order of magnitude too small. They have no rigidity and concentrate too much pressure on the laminate. If you can find a real qualified N/A (other than someone previously associated with this design or builder) that agrees these plates are sufficiently large and proper I will eat my hat.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Polux

I cannot find nothing about a flaw on that report. Please quote the relevant paragraph.

I don't think the building is great, I believe it could be better. You and other are exaggerating regarding the difficulties of repairing and to diagnose damage. Read my last post.

Yes that type of integral molded matrix has disadvantages and one of those is the difficulty in repairing but it has advantages too allowing a bigger surface for bonding and a bigger surface to distribute stress.

This system is used on all Beneteus and Jeanneaus for many years (15? 20?) and the difficulty to make a diagnostic and eventually repair a matrix detachement is not different than on the First 40.7.

Do Minaret means that all those Beneteaus and Jeanneaus have a defect? or a flaw as you put it?

That's a very strange statement if we consider that Beneteaus and Jeanneaus are the leader markets and that nobody would be buying repetitively those boats if they had the maintenance problems you refer at the point of being considered a defect or a flaw.

Other boats with similar prices like Bavaria, Hanse or Dufour don't use that system (an integral keel matrix) and if it was such a disadvantage (or a disadvantage at all) would be them the market leaders and not Jeanneau and Beneteau.

That integral matrix molded structure has advantages and disadvantages regarding other keel structures. The bigger difficulty of repair is one of the disadvantages.

That's exactly what I mean, as I have told you many, many times. McDonalds is also the market leader when it comes to burgers-doesn't mean they have good food. Quite the opposite. These boats are the Quarter Pounder of the boating world. Hanse might rate a Big Mac instead. But if you want the real deal, this is not the way to go. Just like McD is a cheap imitation of a burger, these are cheap imitations of a boat.

[Polux]

"Do Minaret means that all those Beneteaus and Jeanneaus have a defect? or a flaw as you put it? "

Originally Posted by minaret

That's exactly what I mean, as I have told you many, many times. McDonalds is also the market leader when it comes to burgers-doesn't mean they have good food. Quite the opposite. These boats are the Quarter Pounder of the boating world. Hanse might rate a Big Mac instead. But if you want the real deal, this is not the way to go. Just like McD is a cheap imitation of a burger, these are cheap imitations of a boat.

Some light at the end of the tunnel has Exile says. It seems that on this thread there has been a lot of unfair and exaggerated comments particularizing the First 40.7 "defects" and "flaws" when those that have that opinion says that the boat has the same "defects" and "flaws" as all other Beneteau and Jeanneus built since 20 years ago (or so) meaning having an integral "contre moule" and an integral matrix keel support.

These are the same that find that not only the First 40.7 is not suitable for offshore work but all modern Jeanneau and Beneteau. That is clear now and I don't think I have to add anything maybe just a look at this thread that talks about dozens of Beneteaus and Jeanneaus that have circumnavigated (including a First 40.7) that is just a "bit" more that to be suitable to be sailed offshore. Opinions are what they are and each one is entitled to have one, however they can be confirmed by facts or not.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...138908-14.html

Regarding an integral matrix for the keel support it seems to me that it has advantages (bigger surface for bonding, bigger surface for the distribution of the keel loads) and disadvantages (harder to repair or to diagnose a matrix bonding, needing more technological means to be built and only cost effective on a big production scale).

It is obvious that the ones that have to repair the boats that need to be repaired are much more influenced on their judgment by the disadvantages than by the advantages that it offers. Nobody questioning here that this kind of system is harder to inspect and more difficult to repair.

Saying all this I would say that personally I prefer a good smaller structural grid made with stronger materials (carbon). I don't think that with the actual development of bonding agents the bigger surface of an integral matrix is a considerable advantage anymore. Boats like the X yachts or Salona that use that kind of grids have beeing sailing for a long time without known cases of structure detachment (out of groundings).

But I would say also that Beneteau an Jeanneau structural systems are not anywhere near being as problematic as being flawed designed or being defective as some have stated here. In fact if the boats would not have at least a reasonable performance, including in what concerns the need of maintenance, they would not be market leaders 20 years after starting to use this system.

There are other boats of similar price like Bavaria or Hanse that don't use the integral matrix system and it would be them the market leaders if the system was as bad and unreliable as many have said here.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Exile

At long last, some enlightenment! Turns out that most people buy boats because of their intricate knowledge of the type of matrix liner used, as opposed to how inexpensive they are, how much interior space is offered, how much seating they have for entertainment purposes, and how "fast" they go!

But maybe I just misinterpreted or misstated something . . . again. Wait for it . . . .

People buy the boats they choose because they offer the best compromise regarding a given number of different factors.

Safety and seaworthiness is a common nominator for many as interior space decent sailing performance, low maintenance and price.

There are many that have bought several Beneteaus in a row, remaining faithful to the brand. They are not all inexperienced sailors and some have circumnavigated, some are circumnavigating right now.

As I said there are other brands of similar price and offering similar performances and interior space (Hanse, Bavaria) that don't have this type of integral matrix and there is a reason for Beneteau to be a leader and certainly it is not an excessive number of maintenance problems.

I believe it has to do with an edge on design and modern building techniques that had allowed them to remain competitive in price and offering state of the art designs. The Oceanis 38 is a good example while we wait for the first production boat with a rigid wing sail, that will be coming soon.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

"Do Minaret means that all those Beneteaus and Jeanneaus have a defect? or a flaw as you put it? "



Some light at the end of the tunnel has Exile says. It seems that on this thread there has been a lot of unfair and exaggerated comments particularizing the First 40.7 "defects" and "flaws" when those that have that opinion says that the boat has the same "defects" and "flaws" as all other Beneteau and Jeanneus built since 20 years ago (or so) meaning having an integral "contre moule" and an integral matrix keel support.

Unfair and exagerated is 4 lives lost at sea by a production keel.
Other model got diferent designs and diferent kind of problems, or they share the same isue with the 40,7 in a diferent fashion.
20 years ago things are made diferent, or you want to see a piece of grid liner section from a f456 showing the diference in thicknes and quality compared with today crap, i remind you i have a full cutout samples , diferent sizes, and thicknes from a modern beneteau in the shop

These are the same that find that not only the First 40.7 is not suitable for offshore work but all modern Jeanneau and Beneteau. That is clear now and I don't think I have to add anything maybe just a look at this thread that talks about dozens of Beneteaus and Jeanneaus that have circumnavigated (including a First 40.7) that is just a "bit" more that to be suitable to be sailed offshore. Opinions are what they are and each one is entitled to have one, however they can be confirmed by facts or not.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...138908-14.html

Regarding an integral matrix for the keel support it seems to me that it has advantages (bigger surface for bonding, bigger surface for the distribution of the keel loads) and disadvantages (harder to repair or to diagnose a matrix bonding, needing more technological means to be built and only cost effective on a big production scale).

Bigger Surface for bonding???? lol, go ahead and probe that, are you blind?? in many instances they are hollow, like in CR, just the flanges touch the hull with the glue, instead in a proper boat you have the stringers, beams and main supports doing full contact with the hull and glassed all over , quite a diference, even in some grid liners designs they doing a good job, Ip, Hallberg Rassy etc.. the liner is not hollow , they heavy glass the flanges to the hull and bond the whole thing with care, the designs are diferent regarding spreading keel loads, we never see before a Rassy loosing a keel right? and hull ticknes vary from Brand to Brand my friend, the 40,7 got a skiny 8 to 9 mm solid hull ticknes in the bottom, this is what i have in my dingy at the transom...

It is obvious that the ones that have to repair the boats that need to be repaired are much more influenced on their judgment by the disadvantages than by the advantages that it offers. Nobody questioning here that this kind of system is harder to inspect and more difficult to repair.

Point here the advantages ... if you can...

Saying all this I would say that personally I prefer a good smaller structural grid made with stronger materials (carbon). I don't think that with the actual development of bonding agents the bigger surface of an integral matrix is a considerable advantage anymore. Boats like the X yachts or Salona that use that kind of grids have beeing sailing for a long time without known cases of structure detachment (out of groundings).

Obviously you are a dock creature deceived by boat brochures, marketing, and statistics...



But I would say also that Beneteau an Jeanneau structural systems are not anywhere near being as problematic as being flawed designed or being defective as some have stated here. In fact if the boats would not have at least a reasonable performance, including in what concerns the need of maintenance, they would not be market leaders 20 years after starting to use this system.

I think Minaret answer that really well, MacDonalds or a real Burger,,, market leaders in sales numbers dont mean quality...



There are other boats of similar price like Bavaria or Hanse that don't use the integral matrix system and it would be them the market leaders if the system was as bad and unreliable as many have said here.

Look, is not the grid liner or pan liner the point, is the way how to design it and built, those evils in the wrong hands are just a box full of problems ready to Boommm!! in the wrong moment...

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Obviously you are a dock creature deceived by boat brochures, marketing, and statistics...

The rest does not deserve any comment since it is confusing and contradicting regarding the statment you and Minaret have done previously concerning all Jeanneaus and Beneteaus built from 20 years ago being defective or designed flawed.

Regarding me I can enlighten you even if I think that I have done that in other occasions: When I sail I am very rarely at the dock, most time sailing and at anchor. Presently I sail about 3000nm a year and that's because I am cruising slowly. Presently I sail and live on a boat about 5 months a years. Overall I have over 40 000nm (I don't count them).

That's me 2 years ago, sailing slowly on autopilot:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyZkwbb6tiE

Decidedly not a dock creature and regarding being deceived by marketing and statistics I am an Architect with plenty of experience in design and even if boats, in what regards design and built techniques, are only a 15 year old interest I know more then enough about technology, building materials and building processes not to be deceived by market brochures. Besides that I had visited 5 modern shipyards that build modern sailboats with different building techniques, having discussed those techniques with technicians and Nas.

By the way, that's time to sail and in some days I will pick an Airplane to join my boat and as I rarely post while sailing I will not be around most of the time so I wish to all a nice sailing season and fair winds.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by Polux

Decidedly not a dock creature and regarding being deceived by marketing and statistics I am an Architect with plenty of experience in design and even if boats, in what regards design and built techniques, are only a 15 year old interest I know more then enough about technology, building materials and building processes not to be deceived by market brochures. Besides that I had visited 5 modern shipyards that build modern sailboats with different building techniques, having discussed those techniques with technicians and Nas.

I'm in building business and have learned one important lesson about architects (no matter how experienced), they are all trouble. In any project involving an architect 50% premium is required to get most of the quirks and quacks covered thou it's still mostly
You have visited few boatyards and I have built few boats, some of them with my own plans. Minaret and others repair and rebuilt boats. And you think you have more credibility? Eating BigMac's doesn't make one a nutritionist..

[Polux]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

I'm in building business and have learned one important lesson about architects (no matter how experienced), they are all trouble. In any project involving an architect 50% premium is required to get most of the quirks and quacks covered thou it's still mostly
...

You mean, you live on a country where buildings are not designed by architects? You mean that sailboats should not been designed by Naval Architects...because they are all trouble

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

The rest does not deserve any comment since it is confusing and contradicting regarding the statment you and Minaret have done previously concerning all Jeanneaus and Beneteaus built from 20 years ago being defective or designed flawed.

Regarding me I can enlighten you even if I think that I have done that in other occasions: When I sail I am very rarely at the dock, most time sailing and at anchor. Presently I sail about 3000nm a year and that's because I am cruising slowly. Presently I sail and live on a boat about 5 months a years. Overall I have over 40 000nm (I don't count them).

That's me 2 years ago, sailing slowly on autopilot:

Decidedly not a dock creature and regarding being deceived by marketing and statistics I am an Architect with plenty of experience in design and even if boats, in what regards design and built techniques, are only a 15 year old interest I know more then enough about technology, building materials and building processes not to be deceived by market brochures. Besides that I had visited 5 modern shipyards that build modern sailboats with different building techniques, having discussed those techniques with technicians and Nas.

By the way, that's time to sail and in some days I will pick an Airplane to join my boat and as I rarely post while sailing I will not be around most of the time so I wish to all a nice sailing season and fair winds.

Nahh, you dont, no offense, but be a Architect dont make you a NA in the boating industry, this is 2 diferent concepts, you dont get it, i see you arguing with a reputable and charismatic NA , Bob Perry, by the way you see and point some isues i figúrate you dont know what you talking about... Peace...

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by Polux

You mean, you live on a country where buildings are not designed by architects? You mean that sailboats should not been designed by Naval Architects...because they are all trouble

David Sadler who designed the contessa 26 and 32 was originally a Tank ( as in warfare) designer. There are many here who believe in havning heavily built ( and even heavily armed) tanks as their preferred sailboats judging by the recent trends in threads posting .

Enjoy your season and don't bump any hard bits , No doubt the arguments will all still be around when you return .

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Nahh, you dont, no offense, but be a Architect dont make you a NA in the boating industry, this is 2 diferent concepts, you dont get it, i see you arguing with a reputable and charismatic NA , Bob Perry, by the way you see and point some isues i figúrate you dont know what you talking about... Peace...

I don't understand why you keep bringing up Bob Perry. It haS nothing to do with this thread. By the way Bob Perry is not a Naval Architect. He has not a formal education in Naval Architecture. Just a guy that loved boats started to design them and have done pretty good about it specially on the 70's and 80's.

One of the greatest yacht NA from the XX century, Jean Marie-Finot, is just an Architect (not a naval one) that have specialized himself on boat design.

Regarding about not knowing what I am talking about what can I say from a guy that say that all sailboats produced on the last 20 years from the leading manufacturing company (Beneteau) are defective and design flawed?

Those boats have been designed by several of the greatest Nas alive, including Finot/Conq, Phillipe Brian, Bruce Farr, Berret-Racopeau, Juan Kouyoumdjian, Marc Lombard all well know to produce flawed and defective designs.

[neilpride]

Where , when , how?? i say sailboats produced on the last 20 years from the leading manufacturing company (Beneteau) are defective and design flawed? Twisting words hu?