Most boats have liners; which ones do it best?

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by avb3

The concern with liners is access to infrastructure, and especially if repairs are required, as well as the concern of the actual integrity of the bonds used to connect the liner to the hull.

In more modern production boats liners don't really prevent access to "infrastructure". In fact the liner was designed to make installation of wiring and plumbing etc. easy in order to save on labor costs. The only problem with a liner preventing access to something on my 2001 Hunter 410 has been in the aft berth when replacing head hoses because I just couldn't get the hose to go though the hole in the bulkhead (because the messager line I used was too thin and I broke it so it was really my fault), so I just cut a hole in the liner to get access to the space the hose ran in and later installed a panel over it (if I had done to start with would have saved hours).

Maybe back in the 80s when builders were first learning to use liners there were problems because no one knew. But liners in a more modern boat (like a boat that is now 20 years old) probably aren't a problem and are more likely a plus than a minus.

Far as a liner separating; compared to the number of boats with liners out there the number of problems is hardy anything. You would be better off being considered about something more likely to occur. Besides, do you really believe that after years a liner just suddenly comes loose all on its' own or do you think it had some operator help?

But if you want to find ways to believe otherwise based on a few examples I've sure it is possible.

[a64pilot]

As far as IP is concerned, although I have not had to, (fingers crossed) I believe it's the liner that makes replacing the fuel tank a major undertaking, but maybe you can remove the water tank first, then slide the fuel tank where the water tank was and remove it that way, but if you can't, you cutting out the liner and I have no idea how hard that would be.
But no matter how well a liner is executed, I believe it's going to limit access, just nature of the beast.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[a64pilot]

It may be that the nearly perfect boat exists, but if it does, I'm sure it's way out of my price range.
I ended up with a list of things I considered important and tried to get as many as I could knowing of course several weren't going to be possible


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[nortonscove]

I've worked around my liner, having to run wiring etc. And it is far from impossible. I'd say closer to an inconvenience. My background also includes working on and around boats and they may include fewer sailboats my understanding of fibreglass boats is significant. Given my locale and the condutions we use these boats in I fel I have plenty to say on this issue. The big beef I have is the holier than thou authority with which certain members speak. For in 30 years I still feel I have much to learn but I also feel confident in the things I have seen and done.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

It may be that the nearly perfect boat exists, but if it does, I'm sure it's way out of my price range.
I ended up with a list of things I considered important and tried to get as many as I could knowing of course several weren't going to be possible


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Perfect boat does not exist, even with cost no object. And since cost IS an object, for everyone except maybe Abramovich (who doesn't sail), then all the more there is nothing even close to a perfect boat. Everything is a compromise.

Liners greatly facilitate efficient mass production, which greatly reduces cost. This - make no mistake - is a great plus. It's easy for boatyard guys to say simply that these boats are crap - they don't have to pay for them. Their perspective is of course extremely valuable, but it is a narrow point of view which does not consider a lot of factors which really important to the person actually buying the boat.

For many, probably most people, the disadvantages of liners are worth the big cost saving, in my opinion.

I don't like them, but I might well have ended up with one if I had been on a tighter budget when I was buying. Everything, and I mean absolutely everything, is a compromise, where boats are concerned.

Sent from my D6633 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Perfect boat does not exist, even with cost no object. And since cost IS an object, for everyone except maybe Abramovich (who doesn't sail), then all the more there is nothing even close to a perfect boat. Everything is a compromise.

Liners greatly facilitate efficient mass production, which greatly reduces cost. This - make no mistake - is a great plus. It's easy for boatyard guys to say simply that these boats are crap - they don't have to pay for them. Their perspective is of course extremely valuable, but it is a narrow point of view which does not consider a lot of factors which really important to the person actually buying the boat.

For many, probably most people, the disadvantages of liners are worth the big cost saving, in my opinion.

I don't like them, but I might well have ended up with one if I had been on a tighter budget when I was buying. Everything, and I mean absolutely everything, is a compromise, where boats are concerned.

Sent from my D6633 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

A lot of factors, or just one factor? Sure it's an important factor too, but isn't having a boat which doesn't break easily and is possible to fix if it does just as important?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by minaret

A lot of factors, or just one factor? Sure it's an important factor too, but isn't having a boat which doesn't break easily and is possible to fix if it does just as important?

Well, it depends. If you can afford it, then yes. If you plan keep it for decades, and continuously invest in maintaining and upgrading it, then yes.

But for many people it makes sense to buy it new and sell it on in a few years. Even an essentially disposable boat, makes sense, for some people. Not everyone needs a boat which will survive any damage and which can always be repaired, and kept working for decades. We certainly don't demand this of cars, do we?

Sent from my D6633 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Well, it depends. If you can afford it, then yes. If you plan keep it for decades, and continuously invest in maintaining and upgrading it, then yes.

But for many people it makes sense to buy it new and sell it on one a few years. Even an essentially disposable boat, makes sense, for some people. Not everyone needs a boat which will survive any damage and which can always be repaired, and kept working for decades. We certainly don't demand this of cars, do we?

Sent from my D6633 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Yes, more disposable society thinking. For an expensive item which cannot be recycled or built in an environmentally friendly fashion, this attitude disgusts me. Now you are starting to sound like Polux. I do indeed try to buy cars which are extremely robust and safe, and preferably easy to work on. And that is a recyclable item. Comparing boats to cars is all wrong, IMO. Better to compare to houses. Far more similar level of expenditure and environmental impact. You are suggesting a McMansion built of sapling hem/fir and Chinese gypsum is a better buy than an old house with solid construction that needs a bit of upkeep. It's not, in many cases.

[a64pilot]

Cars went the disposable route many years ago, and for at least the last twenty or so years, it's been unnecessary. By that I mean if you got 100,000 miles out of a mid 70's car, you were lucky, now you should get at least twice that, but people keep replacing cars for Status I believe, not at all because at three or four years they are worn out.
Used to be houses were built to last as long as possible, but houses in the US are now build so poorly I believe they are built with maybe a 20 yr life expectancy, and when I was house enamored a few years ago and got caught up in the Mcmansion desire a little myself, I became amazed at how poorly million dollars houses were built, they were built to the same standards as the cheap little houses, just bigger. Idea being get as many square feet as you can I'm sure, big houses are impressive, and that's the point isn't it?

I believe boats are going the same way, quality costs, and I want a BIG boat, to impress my friends, I don't want quality, I want size, that's whats impressive. How many threads of late have been, I want to start cruising, but we would have to have at least 50' to be comfortable?
So now we are beginning to see in my opinion what the buyer wants, BIG boats, that may or may not last, but that's OK cause the original buyer really only wants it to impress their friends, and a manufacturer build for the first buyer, not the second of course

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Well, it depends. If you can afford it, then yes. If you plan keep it for decades, and continuously invest in maintaining and upgrading it, then yes.

But for many people it makes sense to buy it new and sell it on in a few years. Even an essentially disposable boat, makes sense, for some people. Not everyone needs a boat which will survive any damage and which can always be repaired, and kept working for decades. We certainly don't demand this of cars, do we?

Sent from my D6633 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

I definitely am not one of the many people. Bought my last new car in 1973, my last new house in 1977. Never bought a new sailboat.

Cars are just transportation, and the depreciation factor is too great an expense; besides, I hate payments. Houses? I learned after buying the second new one that I'd rather have something where the yard is done, the fence is up, the trees mature, and I only have to worry about maintenance. We all know that we will never recapture upgrades on a boat, and a well maintained boat is a great buy when one finds it.

And as we also know, some new designs and construction methods may not prove to be reliable. When it comes to boats, I lean towards the tried, tested and proven side. Someone else can buy the experimental ones. If they work, they'll be cheaper to buy later on. As long as they have no liners.

[neilpride]

Yeah right! the problem is when some poor souls buy those disposable boats in the market, 2 or third owner, facelift, hiding those expensive problems and ohh yeah I get a deal!!! the ocean have no mercy.......

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Cars went the disposable route many years ago, and for at least the last twenty or so years, it's been unnecessary. By that I mean if you got 100,000 miles out of a mid 70's car, you were lucky, now you should get at least twice that, but people keep replacing cars for Status I believe, not at all because at three or four years they are worn out.
Used to be houses were built to last as long as possible, but houses in the US are now build so poorly I believe they are built with maybe a 20 yr life expectancy, and when I was house enamored a few years ago and got caught up in the Mcmansion desire a little myself, I became amazed at how poorly million dollars houses were built, they were built to the same standards as the cheap little houses, just bigger. Idea being get as many square feet as you can I'm sure, big houses are impressive, and that's the point isn't it?

I believe boats are going the same way, quality costs, and I want a BIG boat, to impress my friends, I don't want quality, I want size, that's whats impressive. How many threads of late have been, I want to start cruising, but we would have to have at least 50' to be comfortable?
So now we are beginning to see in my opinion what the buyer wants, BIG boats, that may or may not last, but that's OK cause the original buyer really only wants it to impress their friends, and a manufacturer build for the first buyer, not the second of course

Not everyone wants a big house, or a big boat, to impress people.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Not everyone wants a big house, or a big boat, to impress people.

Of course not, and maybe I'm getting old and cynical, but it sure seems to me that keeping up with the Jones's is more pronounced than it used to be?
I can't really explain the Mcmansion phase much of any other way? Does any couple really need four or five bedrooms, each with it's own bathroom?


I was thinking about this liner thing, it might turn out to be like automobile uni-body construction, way back all automobile bodies sat on full frames, like pickup trucks still do, anyway along came uni-body construction in the 70's? Many of us thought oh lord there went the good cars, these unibody things first accident they get into, they will be twisted out of shape and impossible to repair.
Well it didn't turn out that way, although I'll forever think the SUV craze came from them being V8 powered, rear wheel vehicles whose bodies sat on frames, full sized US ones anyway.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by minaret

Yes, more disposable society thinking. For an expensive item which cannot be recycled or built in an environmentally friendly fashion, this attitude disgusts me. Now you are starting to sound like Polux. I do indeed try to buy cars which are extremely robust and safe, and preferably easy to work on. And that is a recyclable item. Comparing boats to cars is all wrong, IMO. Better to compare to houses. Far more similar level of expenditure and environmental impact. You are suggesting a McMansion built of sapling hem/fir and Chinese gypsum is a better buy than an old house with solid construction that needs a bit of upkeep. It's not, in many cases.

I didn't say it was better. I said it might be better for some people.

My attitude towards houses is similar to yours. I am obviously no professional concerning boat building, but I know a thing or two about building buildings. I'm not an engineer, but I have 40 architects and engineers working for me right now on one big project.

My apartment is in a 130 year old building with solid brick walls 1.2 meters thick. After 130 years, no settling, cracking, or anything, despite the adjoining building having been obliterated by a Nazi bomb in WWII. It's wonderful living behind walls like that -- they provide thermal and acoustic mass, and they breathe. But it's an irrational way to build, costing a fortune today and eating up a big part of the interior space, with those walls.

My lake house is new construction, which I built. The basement walls are reinforced concrete 40cm thick, on top of a concrete "raft" which is 75cm thick, all more than 3 meters underground. The neighbors teased me about building Hitler's bunker, when we were doing the underground part. Above that, reinforced concrete columns and floor structures, filled with Hebel blocks, then faced with a thick layer of insulation, then stone. The roof is almost 1000m2 (10,000 square feet) of solid copper sheet with standing seams. It took about three years to build and fit out -- I've built tall office building in less time than that, but it was a labor of love.

Overkill? Absolutely. But I look at buildings with a professional eye, the way you look at boats. It gives me pleasure, and I was willing to pay for that pleasure.

But would I insist that any house built a different way, a more rational way, is crap? No way!! Other people have different priorities, needs, and desires, from me.

Now rational mass production, and shoddy production, are not necessarily the same thing. I've seen the shoddy McMansions you are talking about. Residential construction in the U.S. is of generally poor quality, because our homebuilding industry is just generally poor, building to a price without any regard to quality at all. There is no comparison at all between the car industry, which produces generally better and better quality, very efficiently -- even if cars are basically disposable and definitely not designed to be kept running forever. And our homebuilding industry, which builds ever worse crap.

Some mass produced boats are crap, but not all or even most of them. The existence of a liner does not prove that a boat is crap, per se. As someone noted, even some better builders, like Island Packet and Hallberg Rassey, are starting to use partial liners. I don't like liners, and don't have one on my boat, but I think they could be not as bad, if designed carefully and well executed.

I think it's a mistake to make categorical statements about things like this.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Of course not, and maybe I'm getting old and cynical, but it sure seems to me that keeping up with the Jones's is more pronounced than it used to be?
I can't really explain the Mcmansion phase much of any other way? Does any couple really need four or five bedrooms, each with it's own bathroom?


I was thinking about this liner thing, it might turn out to be like automobile uni-body construction, way back all automobile bodies sat on full frames, like pickup trucks still do, anyway along came uni-body construction in the 70's? Many of us thought oh lord there went the good cars, these unibody things first accident they get into, they will be twisted out of shape and impossible to repair.
Well it didn't turn out that way, although I'll forever think the SUV craze came from them being V8 powered, rear wheel vehicles whose bodies sat on frames, full sized US ones anyway.

I think there is definitely a valid comparison between liners and unibody construction on cars. Unibody construction means you have to total the car after any significant collision -- they are not made to undergo significant structural repair. So modern unibody cars are essentially disposable. And as it turns out, where cars are concerned, high quality disposable cars are the best way to do it. Even Bentleys are disposable these days. It's far cheaper, and paying less to begin with, and then just writing it off if you crash it, works out better.

Boats are not exactly the same, of course, because boats are far more complex than cars, and have some elements of houses in them, but still -- there is definitely an element of what you're talking about.


Concerning four or five bedrooms -- well, it depends on how you live, doesn't it? How big is your family? Do you have a lot of guests? Live-in help? Big family gatherings? Some people certainly need four or five, or six or seven.