Oceanis 485 steering failure

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Denise-SJD

Not interested in anyone having to eat crow. We received a letter from Beneteau USA advising us that Beneteau France has made a design change in the rudder tube frame. The new design is more robust and will allow less movement of the router tube platform. We are advised to contact our dealer. Affects out Oceanis 48.

That thing to eat crow is probably pointed to me, not you, by a poster that has that has a very particular way to express himself.

In fact I had objected to some saying that the Beneteau Oceanis were crap and that the rudder structure of your boat is : " inadequate to the point of being a useless toy, or small lake boat at best" and to another saying that Oceanis are crap and that seems to be a real sin on a forum that has a real prejudice towards Beneteau, particularly Oceanis sailboats.

In fact I said also that:

Originally Posted by Polux

...
However Oceanis are used extensively as charter boat and there is few uses that can have so much strain on a sailboat as charter service. From undisclosed groundings to boat abuse and also annual migrations between Caribbean and Atlantic groundings all contribute to that superior wear than the average owner boat

Oceanis would not be used for that service if they were so fragile and would give the number of problems with the easiness that some here have speculated about.

They would all be substituted by Jeanneaus, Bavarias, Dufours or Hanse boats with the same price tag and some even cheaper than the Oceanis.
....
In what concerns rudders I have a different opinion and contrary to keels the only cases that I know off regarding Beneteau concerns the Oceanis line. I don't know of any case with the First line or the Sense line. Given the huge number of the Oceanis around the cases are relatively few but even so raise concerns specially because they have happened on the last 13 years models.

Beneteau had already made two recalls regarding rudder problems on previous models of Oceanis and that should be a warning that the basic rudder system they were using is more prone to have problems than a traditional one with the upper bearing on the cockpit floor.

Not that the system they use namely on the 48 cannot be built strong enough using those materials but it is just a less efficient design and one with more disadvantages namely regarding needing more quality control on all building phases and one where a single small flaw (while building the boat) can have catastrophic effects. Probably also an inherently less strong one, specially if subjected to continued strain.
...
As I said I don't like the design and think that Beneteau should turn again to a more conventional design regarding the rudder set up. Anyway, the number of the boats around without particular problems on that sector, many being used in charter service, other used for service the boat was not designed to, like extensive voyaging and circumnavigations, show that in a general way the structural systems used are nowhere as fragile as this thread make suppose.

My objections regarded only the vast exaggeration that lead several to cal Crap to the Oceanis series (that are the Beneteau main market cruising brand since 1990) and to say that those boats were only suited for sailing on a lake.

Said also that Beneteau owners have a good image of the brand and that stands for something and it is certainly one of the factors that make Beneteau the nº1 in sailboat sales. The fact that your boat have been object to a recall to improve the rudder system is a good sign in what regards care by Beneteau offering to clients support regarding defective or less efficient boat parts or systems.

Sure, it would be better no recall was advisable, but lots of other brands with known problems just shoved them under the carpet and let the clients deal with them.

Are you satisfied with your boat?

[neilpride]

Improve is one thing.
Strengthen is diferent.

[robert sailor]

I have followed this thread with interest, had to bite my fingers a few times to stay out of the fray. It ended up like a typical B movie, a Beneteau or similar boat fails and different evidence comes forward. Polux and a few owners do their best to suggest that the evidence doesn't stand up to scrutiny but in the end the evidence becomes overwhelming in favor of the yard guys and experienced others. Polux's arguments don't quit even when it's clear he should take his ball and go home but he continues on. Even Beneteaus owners don't display this type of brand self interest or loyalty. Polux wants his questions answered but when asked if he receives benifits from Beneteau he goes silent on the subject. It's a compelling question because he displays all the qualities of someone who is engaged with lobbying. In the end Beneteau decides to make amends and design changes, good on them but the cynic in me believes it is forums just like this that drive them to do the right thing. Polux has for years suggested that new production boats are vastly superior in every way to boats built in the past. Better design,better built and higher tech. Boats built by the best designers in the world that would never design something substandard and built by the biggest builders who would never build something substandard and then along comes the day that they do and he continues to sing the same old song. I'm glad we have him on this forum because he is a good debater and he brings the best and worst out of many of the members although it's doubtful he would win a "most congenital " award. It's sad that when Blue Pearl went down that the owner had to live with and pay the price for owning a boat that was defective but at the time Beneteau hadn't decided to "make improvements " to the design.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

... Polux wants his questions answered but when asked if he receives benifits from Beneteau he goes silent on the subject. It's a compelling question because he displays all the qualities of someone who is engaged with lobbying. In the end Beneteau decides to make amends and design changes, good on them but the cynic in me believes it is forums just like this that drive them to do the right thing. ...

That is plain insulting. I have said repeatedly that I have no links with any boat brand. Suggesting that I receive something to manifest my opinion is unfounded, offensive and against forum rules (you are denigrating me without any grounds putting in question my honesty). That is very low and I don't think it should be allowed.

Other knowledgeable members with direct experience on new mass production boats (charter business) have said that the Dufour are not built as well as Oceanis. So why keep denigrating Beneteau and Oceanis on this forum?

So in the end Beneteau decides to modify at is charge, as it has already done before, the rudder design on the 48 and you see that as a result of critics on this forum? Instead of an honest politic regarding modifying at their cost the parts of a boat that proved to be eventually problematic, revealing a very good product follow up?

You are way out of reality,the vast majority of guys that buy new boats don't read this forum, that is composed mostly by old guys with old boats or guys that want to have a bluewater boat to cross oceans for USD 50 000. If Beneteau clients paid any attention of what is said here Beneteau would go bankrupt, but guess what? They are the biggest boat builders and are increasing their market quota.

Get real

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

That is plain insulting. I have said repeatedly that I have no links with any boat brand. Suggesting that I receive something to manifest my opinion is unfounded, offensive and against forum rules (you are denigrating me without any grounds putting in question my honesty). That is very low and I don't think it should be allowed.

Other knowledgeable members with direct experience on new mass production boats (charter business) have said that the Dufour are not built as well as Oceanis. So why keep denigrating Beneteau and Oceanis on this forum?

So in the end Beneteau decides to modify at is charge, as it has already done before, the rudder design on the 48 and you see that as a result of critics on this forum? Instead of an honest politic regarding modifying at their cost the parts of a boat that proved to be eventually problematic, revealing a very good product follow up?

You are way out of reality,the vast majority of guys that buy new boats don't read this forum, that is composed mostly by old guys with old boats or guys that want to have a bluewater boat to cross oceans for USD 50 000. If Beneteau clients paid any attention of what is said here Beneteau would go bankrupt, but guess what? They are the biggest boat builders and are increasing their market quota.

Get real

I'm younger than you..

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Polux

That is plain insulting. I have said repeatedly that I have no links with any boat brand. Suggesting that I receive something to manifest my opinion is unfounded, offensive and against forum rules (you are denigrating me without any grounds putting in question my honesty). That is very low and I don't think it should be allowed.

Other knowledgeable members with direct experience on new mass production boats (charter business) have said that the Dufour are not built as well as Oceanis. So why keep denigrating Beneteau and Oceanis on this forum?

So in the end Beneteau decides to modify at is charge, as it has already done before, the rudder design on the 48 and you see that as a result of critics on this forum? Instead of an honest politic regarding modifying at their cost the parts of a boat that proved to be eventually problematic, revealing a very good product follow up?

You are way out of reality,the vast majority of guys that buy new boats don't read this forum, that is composed mostly by old guys with old boats or guys that want to have a bluewater boat to cross oceans for USD 50 000. If Beneteau clients paid any attention of what is said here Beneteau would go bankrupt, but guess what? They are the biggest boat builders and are increasing their market quota.

Get real

Didn't mean to insult you, sorry. You do display a level of protection towards Beneteau that is beyond normal. Even when shown a construction detail that is obviously poorly designed and poorly built you go into major protection mode on behalf of the company. This isn't normal behavior for someone that doesn't carry a very deep bias towards a particular product. While you suggested it was adequate even Beneteau in the end decided to redo a really poor rudder assembly. Beneteau doesn't have a track record of accepting that it built a poor product so why else would they go good for it. My suggestion that forums like CF could very well play a role in making these types of decisions and don't think for a moment that there are only old guys on this site other than you and I. 😆 Anyways I think this failure shows that Blue Pearl was a defective design as well and it would make sense that they step up and get the guy another boat but what do you think the odds are of that happening? There are other owners out there as well that coughed up their own hard earned cash to make repairs that the biggest boat builder in the world should have looked after. Rather than always supporting the builder, why not get rid of some of the bias and find fault where it is deserved rather than praising a poor design and build.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Didn't mean to insult you, sorry. You do display a level of protection towards Beneteau that is beyond normal. Even when shown a construction detail that is obviously poorly designed and poorly built you go into major protection mode on behalf of the company. This isn't normal behavior for someone that doesn't carry a very deep bias towards a particular product. While you suggested it was adequate even Beneteau in the end decided to redo a really poor rudder assembly. ...

Really? Did I not said it was poorly designed and that should be modified or are you not reading what I say? Did I suggest it was adequate? Or did I say I did not know and that if that was the case Beneteau would perform an upgrade as it had done in other cases?

What I said was that a rudder built that way, with an interior supporting box, if well design and with proper scantlings can be a satisfactory solution, even if not one that I like. The fact that all Oceanis from several decades ago are built with an interior box supporting the rudder structure proves that the system if adequately designed and built works. There are tens of thousands of Oceanis with that type of structure and regarding the number the accidents are rare.

I left well clear that I did not like that design and that Beneteau should change it and return to a more "conventional" design.

Or do you call to be on protection mode and having a deep bias to object strongly to people calling Oceanis crap and other saying that the Oceanis 48 is only suitable to lake sailing? Where is the bias? on me?

Just to remember you what I said about that rudder, since you obviously don't know:

Originally Posted by Polux

.

As I have said repetitively I don't think Oceanis are designed to that kind of extensive cruising and use and certainly they will give much more maintenance problems than a boat built specifically for that use or even a more strongly main market or performance boat, not specifically designed for that use, but much more expensive and built with less restrictions in what regards cutting costs to have a boat the bigger number can afford.

However Oceanis are used extensively as charter boat and there is few uses that can have so much strain on a sailboat as charter service. From undisclosed groundings to boat abuse and also annual migrations between Caribbean and Atlantic groundings all contribute to that superior wear than the average owner boat

Oceanis would not be used for that service if they were so fragile and would give the number of problems with the easiness that some here have speculated about.

They would all be substituted by Jeanneaus, Bavarias, Dufours or Hanse boats with the same price tag and some even cheaper than the Oceanis.

A member of this forum that works on a charter company and that has several brands of recent sailboats on his fleet posted recently about the quality of those boats: [COLOR=Blue]"New Dufours are worse than Beneteau and Jeanneau's". He was referring to maintenance of those boats and "shipyard" problems, meaning problems that need shipyard intervention.

[COLOR=Black]So why targeting particularly Beneteau on this forum an this is not the first time?

Regarding what you say about Beneteau keels being unacceptably built I don't think that it is a particular concern. Two keels were lost on a particular model of a First cruiser-racer and none (that I know off) on an Oceanis. There are much more Oceanis than First by a multiplying factor and even if some concerns may be raised regarding the solidity of the keels of a particular First model it seems completely unjustified to extend those concerns to Oceanis or other Beneteau models.

There are about 600 First 40.7 and from those two lost the keel, there are certainly more than 30 000 Oceanis and I have not heard of any case of one losing the keel. Besides that the maintenance cares with a cruiser racer, specially one used extensively for racing (as it was on the two cases that lost the keel) should be much more frequent and careful than the ones with a boat built and used for general use. On the case of the First that lost the keel it was proved that the maintenance had not been adequate and that both boats have been grounded.

Regarding the Keel structure I agree that Beneteau, Jeanneau and Dufour use a system (integral contre moule) that has the advantage to be cheap (in large scale and using industrial processes) and efficient, distributing the strain for a large surface and offering multiple bonding points, but has the big disadvantage of making a bonding inspection very difficult as well as a reparation, if needed.

I believe something should be made regarding that namely those brands studding an effective process/equipment that would make those inspections easier.

In what concerns rudders I have a different opinion and contrary to keels the only cases that I know off regarding Beneteau concerns the Oceanis line. I don't know of any case with the First line or the Sense line. Given the huge number of the Oceanis around the cases are relatively few but even so raise concerns specially because they have happened on the last 13 years models.

Beneteau had already made two recalls regarding rudder problems on previous models of Oceanis and that should be a warning that the basic rudder system they were using is more prone to have problems than a traditional one with the upper bearing on the cockpit floor.

Not that the system they use namely on the 48 cannot be built strong enough using those materials but it is just a less efficient design and one with more disadvantages namely regarding needing more quality control on all building phases and one where a single small flaw (while building the boat) can have catastrophic effects. Probably also an inherently less strong one, specially if subjected to continued strain.

Off course, I am assuming that the design on the 48 is correct in what regards efforts and scantlings and it may not be the case, as in any design. In that case I am sure Beneteau will made a recall on that model as it had made previously regarding others.

As I said I don't like the design and think that Beneteau should turn again to a more conventional design regarding the rudder set up. Anyway, the number of the boats around without particular problems on that sector, many being used in charter service, other used for service the boat was not designed to, like extensive voyaging and circumnavigations, show that in a general way the structural systems used are nowhere as fragile as this thread make suppose.

My objections regarded only the vast exaggeration that lead several to cal Crap to the Oceanis series (that are the Beneteau main market cruising brand since 1990) and to say that those boats were only suited for sailing on a lake.

[neilpride]

Me think next recall is on bene keels to.

[JPA Cate]

Anyways I think this failure shows that Blue Pearl was a defective design as well and it would make sense that they step up and get the guy another boat but what do you think the odds are of that happening?

--robertsailor


I would not venture odds about that, but everyone will be glad to hear that Blue Pearl's people have a new, different boat, and are currently cruising.

Ann

[robert sailor]

That's good to hear Anne as I heard they had no insurance, always nice to hear a happy ending. Polux you keep suggesting that because a builder designs and builds an inferior product and only a few boats come to grief because of it that it proves that the design was adequate. Someone with your background actually knows better. If you designed a high rise that was built world wide and just a few of them fell over because of poor design do you think your response should be that it was a good design and the proof was that many others are still standing?? I just don't think that would fly but that's always your underlying argument in cases like this. The reason that your argument is wrong is because Beneteau itself has admitted, in their own way that the design and build quality was not adequate. Yes there are thousands of their products sitting in marinas throughout the world, being used on weekends. When the boats get really used and you count the failure rate against the number of boats that are being sailed hard the failure rate changes and future buyers planning on using these boats should keep this in mind. Personally I don't have an axe to grind with any builder but when I see what can happen to people when their boat literally starts to come apart at sea it makes me think this whole CE certification allows some builders at times to hide behind a product certification that doesn't really mean much.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

..Polux you keep suggesting that because a builder designs and builds an inferior product and only a few boats come to grief because of it that it proves that the design was adequate. .... The reason that your argument is wrong is because Beneteau itself has admitted, in their own way that the design and build quality was not adequate. ....

It is not an inferior product is a product with about the same quality of other competing products at the same rage price: Hunter, Bavaria, Jeanneau, Hanse, Dufour.

The fact that they are the nº 1 on that competition says about the comparative quality of their products and their follow up with clients.

It seems you continue not to read what I write and took unsubstantiated conclusions about things I did not said:

Originally Posted by Polux

Beneteau had already made two recalls regarding rudder problems on previous models of Oceanis and that should be a warning that the basic rudder system they were using is more prone to have problems than a traditional one with the upper bearing on the cockpit floor.

Not that the system they use namely on the 48 cannot be built strong enough using those materials but it is just a less efficient design and one with more disadvantages namely regarding needing more quality control on all building phases and one where a single small flaw (while building the boat) can have catastrophic effects. Probably also an inherently less strong one, specially if subjected to continued strain.

Off course, I am assuming that the design on the 48 is correct in what regards efforts and scantlings and it may not be the case, as in any design. In that case I am sure Beneteau will made a recall on that model as it had made previously regarding others.
..

When no adequate they made a recall and a recall was made on the 48 to beef up the rudder assembly. This is normal practice on automotive world where cars are called in frequently for changing potentially problematic or dangerous pieces but unfortunately not a very common practice on the yacht world, not because from time to time boats have not badly designed parts but because that is expensive and only a big brand has to means to financially support it.

You had recently Oyster making a recall on all 825, to beef up the kell structure, after the catastrophic loss of a keel, you have seen in the past Bavaria doing that and several other brands regarding detected problematic built/designed parts. That is a normal practice. Not doing it is what is wrong and as I said, on many cases the problems are just shoved under the carpet and the clients have to deal with them on their own.

I remember the case with Hunter rudders where the clients had to pay to have the problem fixed and I remember the several problems with Tartan, never addressed by the factory and that resulted in bankruptcy.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Polux

It is not an inferior product is a product with about the same quality of other competing products at the same rage price: Hunter, Bavaria, Jeanneau, Hanse, Dufour.

The fact that they are the nº 1 on that competition says about the comparative quality of their products and their follow up with clients.

It seems you continue not to read what I write and took unsubstantiated conclusions about things I did not said:


When no adequate they made a recall and a recall was made on the 48 to beef up the rudder assembly. This is normal practice on automotive world where cars are called in frequently for changing potentially problematic or dangerous pieces but unfortunately not a very common practice on the yacht world, not because from time to time boats have not badly designed parts but because that is expensive and only a big brand has to means to financially support it.

You had recently Oyster making a recall on all 825, to beef up the kell structure, after the catastrophic loss of a keel, you have seen in the past Bavaria doing that and several other brands regarding detected problematic built/designed parts. That is a normal practice. Not doing it is what is wrong and as I said, on many cases the problems are just shoved under the carpet and the clients have to deal with them on their own.

I remember the case with Hunter rudders where the clients had to pay to have the problem fixed and I remember the several problems with Tartan, never addressed by the factory and that resulted in bankruptcy.

I hope you two are having fun going tit for tat?

[neilpride]

JadaJadajadaja,,,,, Paolo, utterly BS, they have that rudder post assembly in the market for many years , its not something they discover yesterday and take actions today, I guess and I throw my 2 cents that someone in the company see some traces of bad reputation in the air but hey,, he take a look to late since this problems and others are stamped in the market for to long, like you say thousands of those 48 out there sailing happy with a defective rudder product, congratulations , if you are in Vanuatu please stop at your nearby boatyard for some rudder post carnage ... silly situation.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by neilpride

JadaJadajadaja,,,,, Paolo, utterly BS, they have that rudder post assembly in the market for many years , its not something they discover yesterday and take actions today, ...

Yes, not very different in basic concept of the Oceanis from Mark and he has circumnavigated and continue sailing without problem. I do not like the concept, as I have already said, but it is obvious that if correctly designed and built it can provide satisfactory results.

On some few boats the scantlings or the particular design proved wrong and they were subjected to recalls.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by Polux

Yes, not very different in basic concept of the Oceanis from Mark and he has circumnavigated and continue sailing without problem. I do not like the concept, as I have already said, but it is obvious that if correctly designed and built it can provide satisfactory results.

On some few boats the scantlings or the particular design proved wrong and they were subjected to recalls.

The rudder assembly on the B393 is diferent and compared to the oceanis big brothers better built and designed...