Another Bene with broken rudder bits

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Oh? Why? And what do you think the owners of Blue Pearl would say in response to that statement?

And your report of enjoying a short charter in a Bennie... well, that is hardly a testimonial leading to selection of that model for extended offshore usage, the situation that most of us are considering here.

Jim

Let's not let this discussion be a brawl. There's no reason for it.

I had not a short charter but successive multi-week charters on Benes over a number of years. I know them pretty well. They are good boats, if not, by a long shot, the strongest offshore boats ever made.

When I went to buy a boat for extensive offshore cruising, I did not choose a Bene. I do not think that they are the ideal tool for that job (but nor are they, by far, the worst). But I really don't think you can say that all Benes are unsuitable for offshore cruising because of one Blue Pearl incident. Are you really saying that? Plenty of people sail them far and wide without any trouble. They are not as strong as many other boats but they are plenty strong enough for most kinds of offshore use.

If you choose something stronger and more expensive, or stronger and heavier and thus slower -- those are perfectly reasonable choices, but not the only reasonable choices.

[Jim Cate]

DH, I wasn't brawling, I was referring to your "you gotta cut them (Bene mfg) some slack" statement. I don't agree, and I don't think that the owners of Blue Pearl would either. They are morally and legally (I think... not a lawyer) responsible for the suitability for usage of their products.

I'm on record here on CF as agreeing that many of these sorts of boats are usually suitable for offshore voyaging. I do not think that the stricture requiring inspection after grounding is acceptable. Wasn't me that said it was necessary, but several posters seemed to think it was an acceptable factor in boat selection and in the subject Bennie's design and execution.

Jim

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

The Cyclades mast is not the same as the Oceanis, the Cyclades hull is not the same as the Oceanis, the Cyclades sport outboard chainplates and long sweep back spreaders ...

I remembered this discussion at the time the boat was on the market:

"Cyclades range is a more basic (cheaper aimed at charter market) version of the Oceanis range. They have same hulls rig etc but less ports and different interior layout. Performance of the Cyclades 43 should be the same as Oceanis 43."

buying ex sunsail [Archive] - Yachting and Boating World Forums

But you are right. I knew that the Moorings 43.3 had the same hull of the Oceanis 43 and was basically an Oceanis 43, but it turns out that there are two versions of the Moorings 43.3, one based on the Cyclades other on the Oceanis 43.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

I want to make sure that my comments are not about all Benni's nor all new entry level boats but in particular the Cyclades models. There certainly are many Benni models that are great boats for offshore sailing I just don't think this is one of them!

I had looked a bit about owners and others that sailed the Cyclades said about the boat and even if not as strong as the Oceanis it seemed that the general consensus is that the boat is fit to be sailed offshore even if only on the right season. The fact that they had circumnavigated seems to show that they are not as crappy as you want to make believe:

Originally Posted by atoll

i delivered a 43 a few years ago from wales to portugal,the 1000 mile trip took 6 1/2 days,so was quite impressed with its performance,and fuel economy.
i would not worry about taking one to the caribbean from europe.

Originally Posted by Zanshin

Your friend is right. Many posts about certain boats not being bluewater-capable are written by those whose knowledge doesn't come from bluewater experience, and a corollary is that some posts about bluewater-capability in other boats are also written by (others) with no bluewater experience.
....
I had, for a short interim period, a 43.3 Beneteau Cyclades (see Kinsale, the trade-in boat) and spent a lot of time in every nook and cranny cleaning her up for sale - she was an ex-charter boat and needed some cosmetic work. I found that she was built a bit lighter than the Oceanis series boats but with a good crew and some storm sails and preparation I'm sure that she would weather some nasty weather. The boat is quite light and commensurately fast.

Once you get to the Caribbean the boat is perfect for the conditions there...

Originally Posted by Dockhead

You got perfect advice

The sailor is much more important than the boat. Your main question should be whether you are up to the job -- the boat will be fine.

Furthermore, a modern Beneteau cruising boat, even a Cyclades, is very far from the worst boat for the job -- fast, and good downwind -- I'd say it's actually a good choice for a downwind tradewinds crossing to the Carib. I'd certainly prefer something like that for that kind of crossing, to the kind of heavy, slow, full-keel boat some traditionalists consider to be quintessential "blue water" boats.

Now the condition of the boat is a different question -- certainly, you should prepare and equip it carefully. The ARC documents have some pretty good tips on that.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I've delivered these and several like them.
....
As to general suitability , she's plenty big, and entirely suitable with some careful prep and sail conservatively. Remember the key on long distances is not to break stuff.
Downhill ( I presume its a east to west crossing , she'll run well with good control. Again you'll need a good autopilot and possibly a spare. ...
Dave

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I spent the better part of a million dollars on a boat which is extremely strong and nevertheless very light. But it was just a lucky accident that I happened to have the money at that moment. I certainly couldn't afford to buy a boat like this if I were buying now.

Boats are like lots of things -- bicycles, airplanes -- they can be light, strong, or cheap -- pick any two. If I were forced to tradeoff light against strong, I would give up some strength, let's say some margin of error in strength, because all modern boats are more or less strong enough, and I like to sail, long distances and with some speed. I would worry more about hitting containers or getting damaged in a collision, than I do in my present boat, but there's always something to worry about at sea, isn't there?

Now the Bene rudder tubes on some models might be a serious design defect which goes beyond the normal tradeoff between light and cheap. But it sounds like it's been rectified with a recall. So I wouldn't hesitate to choose a Bene (or more likely, a Jeanneau), if that was what my budget allowed. I like them, and I like the way they sail.

Other people will make a different tradeoff and will buy something like an Island Packet -- which is nearly indestructible, and with its massive full keel with encapsulated ballast and fully protected, attached rudder will certainly never suffer any damage from any grounding.

Still other people, like Polux, would choose the most extreme racing-type design he could find. That's his choice, which I understand and respect, even if it's not my own choice.

How stupid would it be for me, to criticize someone else for making a different tradeoff and a different choice than mine? I would never do it. We should respect each other more.

Everyone has different tradeoffs.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

DH, I wasn't brawling, I was referring to your "you gotta cut them (Bene mfg) some slack" statement. I don't agree, and I don't think that the owners of Blue Pearl would either. They are morally and legally (I think... not a lawyer) responsible for the suitability for usage of their products.

I'm on record here on CF as agreeing that many of these sorts of boats are usually suitable for offshore voyaging. I do not think that the stricture requiring inspection after grounding is acceptable. Wasn't me that said it was necessary, but several posters seemed to think it was an acceptable factor in boat selection and in the subject Bennie's design and execution.

Jim

Jim, how would you feel about a boat which not only requires inspection after a grounding, but cannot be inspected without cutting out parts of the hull liner and then repairing it, which obviously discourages proper inspection? How do you insure that a hull liner bond has not failed with the hull liner in place? With a partial liner, or a few of the more well thought out liners that provide adequate access, it can be possible. But I assure you there are many full liners where proper inspection of the areas most likely to fail is not possible without major and expensive surgery.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

....
Still other people, like Polux, would choose the most extreme racing-type design he could find. That's his choice, which I understand and respect, even if it's not my own choice.

How stupid would it be for me, to criticize someone else for making a different tradeoff and a different choice than mine? I would never do it. We should respect each other more.

Well, not true. I could if my wife let me but even if he allowed me full liberty and I had the money I would go to something very fast but with a good interior like the Xp 44. There is one starting a circumnavigation...I guess that guy and me have the same taste regarding boats, he just has more money.

Have a look at the interior of my boat and you will understand that is not the "most extreme racing type" just a fast performance cruiser with a good cruising interior and a good tankage:

http://www.comaryachts.it/VirtualTour.Aspx?TourId=2

The XP44 is also far from a "extreme racing type" even if less cozy than my boat, only a dam fast one. A very strong and seaworthy boat too:





That XP 44 that is circumnavigating as done the ARC sailing as fast as the fastest performance cats. I guess the guy likes to go fast LOL

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by CaptNemoO2

Neil,

Your statement and/or time line has me confused. If I understand your earlier post correctly, you're saying Beneteau's Oceanis line started in 2000? Or the Oceanis line made after 2000 has a poor design? Then this post says all of the large Beneteaus in the Oceanis line had a poor design. I'm just curious, because if my time line (for the 50') is correct, and I may be wrong is as follows:

Idylle 15.50 - last year was 1987
Oceanis 500 - 1988 to 1991
Oceanis 510 - 1992 to 1994
Beneteau 50 - 1995 to 2004

After 2004, there was the Cyclades 50.5, and the Oceanis 49. The Oceanis 50 returned in 2010.

I'm just curious, could you please clarify your statement.

And just to add to the discussion (not as fuel for any argument either way) as far my boat goes, the 510, the rudder post does not attach to any bulkhead. It has two large gusset in front and two on the sides that go from the top of the tube to the hull. I believe there is one going aft too but I haven't stuck my head back there as my hull is different than most other 510's. Mine has a drop down platform rather than the lockers commonly seen, which is kind of visible in the attached picture. If I ever get out of work at a decent hour, I'll take a picture of the rudder support.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

No no, what i mean is for me the basic quality droped since 2000, for example a old oceanis 500 have a diferent quality in construction in the rudder post v the new Oceanis 50, the actual oceanis 46 have the same Rudder post isue v a Oceanis 50, and the Beneteau 50 is to me the end of the line regarding to have a decent 50 footer with few isues or flaws,,,,,

After that things change a lot in the final quality in the production line, no more rudder post trough the top deck bearing supp, masive use of glue for bonding ply panels to form structural rudder supports, the hull layups go thiner and structural grid liners grow in size, i have diferents FG cutouts in the shop from a new Oceanis 50 and a old beneteau 50 , taken from the bottom under the engine room, the bene 50 is 10 mm single sking and the Oceanis 50 is 8 mm taken from the bottom to..

A old F456 is one of the firsts using a masive hull liner, when i say masive i mean the material used to make the liner, rudder post fiberglassed, and no ikea furniture around, so to me the product drop in quality and grow in features ..... What can i say?? you can take this boats in a RTW , why not? but you need to be aware of the construction flaws and keep it in mind ... rectify, fix it,,, or live with them under your own risk...

[CaptNemoO2]

Originally Posted by neilpride

No no, what i mean is for me the basic quality droped since 2000, for example a old oceanis 500 have a diferent quality in construction in the rudder post v the new Oceanis 50, the actual oceanis 46 have the same Rudder post isue v a Oceanis 50, and the Beneteau 50 is to me the end of the line regarding to have a decent 50 footer with few isues or flaws,,,,,

After that things change a lot in the final quality in the production line, no more rudder post trough the top deck bearing supp, masive use of glue for bonding ply panels to form structural rudder supports, the hull layups go thiner and structural grid liners grow in size, i have diferents FG cutouts in the shop from a new Oceanis 50 and a old beneteau 50 , taken from the bottom under the engine room, the bene 50 is 10 mm single sking and the Oceanis 50 is 8 mm taken from the bottom to..

A old F456 is one of the firsts using a masive hull liner, when i say masive i mean the material used to make the liner, rudder post fiberglassed, and no ikea furniture around, so to me the product drop in quality and grow in features ..... What can i say?? you can take this boats in a RTW , why not? but you need to be aware of the construction flaws and keep it in mind ... rectify, fix it,,, or live with them under your own risk...

Ok, thanks for clearing that up. But one more question, 10mm? That's it?

Attached is a picture I took when replacing a seized head outlet seacock. It's located a few inches aft of the mast, about 6 inches below the waterline. The piece of red fiberglass is a 1/2" thick backing plate I glued to the hull. The hull is way thicker than 10mm, granted the chain plates are just above that, so that maybe why it's so thick. I have not replaced any other thru hulls yet.

And sorry for the thread drift!

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[neilpride]

Thats it,, 10 mm measured with a caliper, a dry cutout, not delaminated...


Lol that picture can say only one thing, those old benes are way way better made than today standars,,.... and the backing plate is the right way to make a proper trhuhull installation, congratulations....

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Boats are like lots of things -- bicycles, airplanes -- they can be light, strong, or cheap -- pick any two.

If you pick two, it seems the only choices the modern mfgs. are giving us are either light & strong (and expensive), or light & cheap (and not all that strong, depending). But what about strong & cheap? I'm not necessarily talking about slow full keelers or reproducing designs from the past, but rather boats which give up some performance for strength like your Moody, but are produced for a price commensurate with the mass-produced boats?

I suppose the answer is that there's an insufficient market for them. Most new boat buyers seem to want light, fast & roomy (like Polux!), or at least that's what the mfgs. think they want. But does building strength into a boat necessarily mean it has to be more expensive? It seems like when buying new these days, there are only Mercedes or there are Fords & Chevy's, but not much in between.

[goboatingnow]

People showing pictures of boats sitting in calm water waiting for the return of the tide are missing the point.

In almost any boat today, they will take quite a bit of a abuse of the keel, however spade rudders are ver susceptible to twisting moments or been driven up into the hull . Hence grounding where you suspect rudder contact in my view need to be inspected.

People mention blue pearl. But didn't she have a suspected previous rudder damage.

In my personal experience , anytime we had an unexpected failure there was " history " to the boat

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

People showing pictures of boats sitting in calm water waiting for the return of the tide are missing the point.

In almost any boat today, they will take quite a bit of a abuse of the keel, however spade rudders are ver susceptible to twisting moments or been driven up into the hull . Hence grounding where you suspect rudder contact in my view need to be inspected.

People mention blue pearl. But didn't she have a suspected previous rudder damage.

In my personal experience , anytime we had an unexpected failure there was " history " to the boat

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Here is the history....eplies As previous owners of a 2007 Beneteau Oceanis 50, my wife and I are keen to investigate whether there is any pattern of failures regarding the Beneteau brand of sailboats that needs to be addressed in order to improve safety. This is not a witch-hunt, but rather a genuine attempt to try and get a history of facts and events where Beneteau’s of all sizes have failed, especially where there has been a catastrophic failure, such as ours.
We lost a rudder in benign conditions in the Caribbean Sea in October 2013. The rudder inexplicably snapped off 72nm from land without any apparent cause. We replaced it with a brand new rudder from Beneteau in France and it was fitted by a person recommended by a Beneteau representative. When we dropped the rudder post from our boat, we found that it was from a Beneteau Cyclades with hull number 5088. Our sailboat was an Oceanis 50 and had hull number 5080. We have still not received a satisfactory response from Beneteau regarding which rudder was fitted to our boat at the factory.
Here is a pic of the rudder post:
Etched with Cyclade 5088 and another number

When asked to confirm whether they had fitted this particular Cyclades rudder post to our Oceanis, Beneteau’s only response was that the Cyclades and the Oceanis rudders are interchangeable. We need to pursue this issue further in order to get more clarity on this and will post anything further we receive from Beneteau regarding this.
When the replacement rudder arrived we confirmed that Beneteau had failed to drill holes into the rudder post at the factory. The Beneteau representative in France said that they had tried to save time by not drilling holes enabling the rudder to be dispatched a day earlier. We had not requested any shortcuts to be taken with the manufacturing process of the rudder.
After receiving the new rudder the person recommended by the Beneteau representative had to drill holes into the rudder post before it could be fitted completely. He drilled holes that did not line up the way they should have and subsequently had to drill extra holes in the post. He assured us that this would have no effect on the integrity of the rudder. He then proceeded to fit the rudder.
We were also reassured by the Beneteau representative in Martinique that the person he was recommending to fit our rudder, had fitted numerous rudders to Beneteaus in the water. He addressed our initial concern and reassured us that the fitting of the rudder in the water was quite normal and that there was no need to have the boat hauled out.
After our new rudder was fitted we sailed from Martinique to Puerto Rico, then on to the United States. We then sailed to the Turks and Caicos Islands before leaving for a Trans-Atlantic crossing on 12th April 2014.
Roughly halfway between Bermuda and the Azores on 25th April 2014 (about the 14th day at sea), the rudder and post pulled the aft bulkhead away and snapped the cables on the steering quadrant. It also came loose in the rudder shaft housing and this created an ever increasing hole where the bearings are housed, causing the boat to take on water rapidly. The bilge pumps became overwhelmed and the boat sank within approximately an hour and a half of taking on water. This happened in a storm with 36 knots of wind and seas between 30 and 40 foot. No ocean going yacht should suffer rudder failure or sink in the conditions we experienced.
We were in grave danger and had to take to a life-raft in the middle of the North Atlantic Ocean at approximately 8.30pm. The United States Coast Guard were instrumental in our rescue and we are lucky to be alive. Our story on our ordeals will be written in due course, so please look out for our book.
In short, we are writing this blog because we want to get to the bottom of why our rudder failed, why we lost our sailboat and why we nearly lost our lives. We want to make a concerted effort to obtain information that will assist all sailors and owners or potential owners of Beneteau sailboats. If there is any inherent flaw, design fault, or any issue relating to the build process, we want to ensure that sailors are protected from any failures that can be or could have been avoided.
With this in mind, we invite anyone with any information to contact us. We wish to remain factual and appreciate any input relating to this topic, which might contribute to the safety of the sailing community.
We trust that you will find this topic not only interesting, but that you will also find useful and helpful information along the way. Once again, this is not an attempt to slate the Beneteau brand of sailboats, which are beautiful boats. It is an attempt to have Beneteau rectify any issues or concerns to sailors worldwide.
Thank you for your interest. We will be posting pictures wherever possible, so please bookmark us as this story unfolds.
Have a look at this link to read about the actual event: http://www.gofundme.com/8z4tjc

Kind regards.
Len & Lisa Rorke

[robert sailor]

And hear is a reply he got from another person who's daughter owned a similar boat.

Hi there,
When my daughter bought a cyclades 50 from Moorings in October 2011 they were advised to strengthen the upper rudder bearing support shelf where it attaches to the bulkhead before going offshore. Moorings said there had been a problem with the bonding between the support shelf and the bulkhead on some boats – the bulkhead was coated before bonding, and sometimes the coating itself failed, not the glue. They carried out strengthening by glassing the shelf to the bulkhead, which cured the problem and there was no sign of movement after 15,000 offshore miles. It sounds like your problem was caused by the failure of that support shelf.
I saw a technical advice bulletin drawing attention to the problem and advising strengthening work to prevent any failures (from beneteau to moorings, I think, but it could have been between moorings BVI and other Moorings centres.). I can’t find a copy of that bulletin on the net, but Moorings BVI might have it? Sorry to hear of your trouble – hopefully resolved by now

[CaptNemoO2]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Thats it,, 10 mm measured with a caliper, a dry cutout, not delaminated...


Lol that picture can say only one thing, those old benes are way way better made than today standars,,.... and the backing plate is the right way to make a proper trhuhull installation, congratulations....

Thanks! I've only had the boat for two seasons now, but so far it seems pretty well built. The original owner spec'd it out for serious cruising (or so I've been told). In fact, looking through the paperwork, he did the 50 hour oil change off the coast of North Carolina. I have no real desire to cross oceans, if anything, maybe up and down the coast and the Caribbean. But I have at least another 35 years of working left. But being a production boat, it does have some access problems, mostly in the heads, where they have a drop in liner for the shower. Trying to get to that thru hull was a pain. It was through a door under the sink, and I had to choose between seeing or using my left arm. I'm a righty! I ended up using a dremel and cut the thru hull out from outside.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app