The Yard Guys

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

I'm not really that hard to please. I'm just looking for examples that have at least some scant amount relevance.

Specifically, I'm looking for evidence of production boats that had serious structural issues from "normal use" - you know, like sailing through an F10 in the North Sea or sailing across the Pacific.

T-boning steel trawlers has never been part of the design/build spec for any sailboat that I know of - production or "bluewater" - so saying that the build was a bit a bit light for this use is beyond ridiculous.

For example, the layup is "thin and flimsy"...for what? Cruising the oceans or hitting steel trawlers? It's only "thin and flimsy" if it fails while cruising the oceans. So, far I've not seen ANY reports of hulls failing like this while cruising the oceans.

So, my point is, your example is interesting. But for showing any actual deficiencies with Beneteaus in particular or production boats at large...

Fail.

Yes, you are right, dont make sense, and i agree the trawler v bene end bad but end bad for any boat, but take a break and think this for one second, if the bow área in that beneteau is ridiculous thin, what we can expect from the bottom or the rest of the hull? i mean the bow área normally is the strongest part of the boat with the bilge hull turn and stern ..

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

I'm not really that hard to please. I'm just looking for examples that have at least some scant amount relevance.

Specifically, I'm looking for evidence of production boats that had serious structural issues from "normal use" - you know, like sailing through an F10 in the North Sea or sailing across the Pacific.

T-boning steel trawlers has never been part of the design/build spec for any sailboat that I know of - production or "bluewater" - so saying that the build was a bit a bit light for this use is beyond ridiculous.

For example, the layup is "thin and flimsy"...for what? Cruising the oceans or hitting steel trawlers? It's only "thin and flimsy" if it fails while cruising the oceans. So, far I've not seen ANY reports of hulls failing like this while cruising the oceans.

So, my point is, your example is interesting. But for showing any actual deficiencies with Beneteaus in particular or production boats at large...

Fail.

I see we're back to your "intended purpose" theme. The Bene's we've been discussing are marketed for world wide ocean cruising and, as you've pointed out, many of them are used for that purpose. When you buy a Bene should you be required to make a written promise that you won't sail to the high latitudes, hit any rocks, or screw up when docking?

Rather than an unrealisticly narrow "intended purpose" test, how about we expect mfgs. who make ocean going yachts to design & build to a "reasonably foreseeable" standard? The DOT requires auto & motorcycle mfgs. to only install tires on new vehicles that are speed rated to the max speed the vehicle is capable of going. Is the "intended purpose," at least in the US, to drive down the road at 120 mph all day long? Of course not. But is it reasonably foreseaable that somebody could do that? Yes, and that's why the DOT wants to insure that at least the tires won't blow out.

So is hitting a steel trawler reasonably foreseeable? Maybe. A Bristol 32 did just that a few years ago off the coast of France on an Atlantic crossing, collapsed the bow somewhat, but suffered no lay-up failure and made it to port just fine. But more to the point, if you sail long enough you are going to hit something. Maybe not in your personal & limited offshore sailing experience, but that's hardly relevant. Even more importantly here is yet another opinion from the "Yard Guys" that stronger built boats would have fared better.

Maybe the title of this thread should be changed to "Listen to the Yard Guys."

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

For example, the layup is "thin and flimsy"...for what? Cruising the oceans or hitting steel trawlers? It's only "thin and flimsy" if it fails while cruising the oceans. So, far I've not seen ANY reports of hulls failing like this while cruising the oceans.

Unfortunately, I think "hitting things" is, or at least should be, part of the design brief of a long distance cruising boat.

It might be some large floating debris, it might be a rock, sooner or later it will happen. Dockhead's recent example is not unusual, most cruising boats I know have experienced similar problems.

No boat can be designed to survive anything, but especially when sailing remote areas a boat than can survive with minimal damage is a very desirable. Some would say an essential requirement.

Light, cheap and strong is not possible.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Unfortunately, I think "hitting things" is, or at least should be, part of the design brief of a long distance cruising boat.

It might be some large floating debris, it might be a rock, sooner or later it will happen. Dockhead's recent example is not unusual, most cruising boats I know have experienced similar problems.

No boat can be designed to survive anything, but especially when sailing remote areas a boat than can survive with minimal damage is a very desirable. Some would say an essential requirement.

Light, cheap and strong is not possible.

And yet on many boats with a bonded hull liner it's not even possible to inspect for the (very likely) delamination without expensive surgery, in the ever so foreseeable event of a grounding.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

I'm not really that hard to please. I'm just looking for examples that have at least some scant amount relevance. support my point of view.

Specifically, I'm looking for evidence of production boats that had serious structural issues from "normal use" - you know, like sailing through an F10 in the North Sea or sailing across the Pacific.

T-boning steel trawlers has never been part of the design/build spec for any sailboat that I know of - production or "bluewater" - so saying that the build was a bit a bit light for this use is beyond ridiculous.

For example, the layup is "thin and flimsy"...for what? Cruising the oceans or hitting steel trawlers? It's only "thin and flimsy" if it fails while cruising the oceans. So, far I've not seen ANY reports of hulls failing like this while cruising the oceans.

So, my point is, your example is interesting. But for showing any actual deficiencies with Beneteaus in particular or production boats at large...

Fail.

Well, Smack, once again you reject data that does not support your arguments. I agree that hitting a trawler this hard is beyond average cruising experience, but hitting SOME floating or fixed object is a fairly common experience. The oft mentioned shipping container, a log, another yacht (especially whilst racing), a fuel dock... these sorts of collisions are pretty common, and the degree of damage sustained from them can mean survival or non survival if it happens out to sea. The opinion of these yard guys was that this boat was damaged more severely than others they had worked upon that were more heavily built and that had been involved in collisions of some sort.

Your denial does not convince me, and I reject your "failing grade" and your ridicule. In general, your dismissive treatment of others information is kinda rude and in your terms "fails" an objectivity test.

Jim

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Yes, you are right, dont make sense, and i agree the trawler v bene end bad but end bad for any boat, but take a break and think this for one second, if the bow área in that beneteau is ridiculous thin, what we can expect from the bottom or the rest of the hull? i mean the bow área normally is the strongest part of the boat with the bilge hull turn and stern ..

Like I said above, I will believe it's "ridiculous thin" when I see some evidence that these hulls are breaking up while being sailed in blue water...in rough conditions. If that's not happening, then the thickness is probably just right.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Unfortunately, I think "hitting things" is, or at least should be, part of the design brief of a long distance cruising boat.

It might be some large floating debris, it might be a rock, sooner or later it will happen. Dockhead's recent example is not unusual, most cruising boats I know have experienced similar problems.

No boat can be designed to survive anything, but especially when sailing remote areas a boat than can survive with minimal damage is a very desirable. Some would say an essential requirement.

Light, cheap and strong is not possible.

I generally agree with this. I think it was the other thread that showed a Jeanneau that had slammed its keel into a rock at hull speed with no damage to the boat - just a bigass dent in the keel. I'm sure there are other examples out there.

But let's at least try to keep the discussion somewhat sane. To post pics of a Bene that hit a freakin' steel trawlyer to try to make some ludicrous point about the "weakness" of a Bene's bow/hull/structure? Please. That's just laughable.

And it's just as laughable, possibly more so, if what you guys are trying to say is that a "heavy bluewater boat" is the boat you should buy for hitting stuff. Good grief.

[Island Time O25]

A thicker lay up only does not guarantee a "solidly built boat". It is the cumulative effect of all the better executed little details that matter in the long run. While many current production boats are wonderful boats for everyday use and not just as dock queens you see right away at the boat show which were built for serious cruising and which were designed by naval architects who themselves never sailed them or intended to sail them. The sharp corners of the faux IKEA-quality wood trim, which delaminates after first few seasons, the 6gal waste tank on a 42footer with no room to install a decent size tank, the unfinished sharp and scratchy insides of cockpit lockers which will cut any hand trying to find something inside in boisterous seas, the too flimsy rigging not installed with a 50+kt gale in mind, the too large and too thin windows and hatches which will not stand well before a decent size wave, etc, etc.

Too many buyers focus on manufacturer provided technical data and not enough on real life result of the product made with the goal of squeezing every last dollar from the transaction so that the corporate annual financial statement looks good for potential investors or buyout guys. Of the boat builders that went bankrupt very few went bankrupt because of quality issues with their product. These profit squeezers are still around. It is the Pearsons, the Odays, the Mariners which suffered because they built quality boats which found too few buyers with most looking at the bottom line and not at long term quality build.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

A thicker lay up only does not guarantee a "solidly built boat". It is the cumulative effect of all the better executed little details that matter in the long run. While many current production boats are wonderful boats for everyday use and not just as dock queens you see right away at the boat show which were built for serious cruising and which were designed by naval architects who themselves never sailed them or intended to sail them. The sharp corners of the faux IKEA-quality wood trim, which delaminates after first few seasons, the 6gal waste tank on a 42footer with no room to install a decent size tank, the unfinished sharp and scratchy insides of cockpit lockers which will cut any hand trying to find something inside in boisterous seas, the too flimsy rigging not installed with a 50+kt gale in mind, the too large and too thin windows and hatches which will not stand well before a decent size wave, etc, etc.

I agree with you IT (except that 50+ knots is not really a gale - it's a storm). I wouldn't want a boat like you describe either. Which one is that?

[Jim Cate]

But other Yard Guys keep mentioning boats they've worked on that had failed rudders, or bulkheads, or chainplates or whatever. THESE ARE THE KINDS OF EXAMPLES THAT WE'D LOVE TO SEE. And photos, like in Minaret's thread, would be extremely helpful - not just posted claims that "I worked on 7 XYZ's with warped vanity lids....blah, blah...." Pics or it didn't happen.

The reason for this thread is simple...by seeing the various common problems The Yard Guys have to fix, you can begin to see if the boat you're interested in (regardless of brand) exhibits common problems that you need to be aware of.

Hey Smack, do you remember writing these words in your thread-starting post?

I guess you forgot to say that pictures and yard guy opinions that didn't agree with your postulates would be ridiculed and dismissed.

And to answer your query to Exile about "Did the Bene sink, or did it make it in to port just fine?": After the crew from the trawler helped cut away the fallen mast and sails, they towed the Bene into the marina at Yamba. It was making water at a great rate, but the pumps and buckets kept it afloat until it was jerked from the water. Is that "just fine"? I dunno, but I bet that the owner and crew of the Bene would have been happier if the splits in the hull had stopped shorter and not let in so much water.

Thanks for all the pictures of nice boats and small ships in dire straits. Now tell us what their point was in this discussion. Were these vessels involved in collisions? Or did their rudders fall off, this leading to colliding with the shore? What did the yard guys have to say about them?

Finally, you are correct to question my cruising abilities, for I'm only a beginner. How about you?

Jim

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

I agree with you IT (except that 50+ knots is not really a gale - it's a storm). I wouldn't want a boat like you describe either. Which one is that?

Any of the Hanses. And btw they are very popular among semi-well heeled newbies who know squat about sailing. My friend who works at the sialing club is often asked by potential buyers to recommend a boat. And almost always they end up with low end but new or almost new boat such as Hanse, Hunter or Bavaria. He always recommends a real ofshire cruiser but of course it would have to be at least 10 years old to be in the same price range. And most newbies balk at that that advice. Except when he recommended a model I have. ))

He did not know about Mariners (NH) at all until the first time he came with me for a pre-purchase inspection as only about 80 were built in the late 70s-early 80s. Having sailed her with me many times and helped me fix this and that he was very impressed. He did recommend same make and model to a club member who was semi-retiring and wanted to cruise down South and possibly liveaboard. The guy found one right away as being now 30+ years old they are being sold by their 1st or 2nd owners about this time, and already departed without doing much to her other than the usual pre-long cruise prep. My friend does harp on Sabres though for being way overrated and overhyped for the price. Mine was about 1/2 price of a Sabre 36 of similar age and shape.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Hey Smack, do you remember writing these words in your thread-starting post?

I guess you forgot to say that pictures and yard guy opinions that didn't agree with your postulates would be ridiculed and dismissed.

And to answer your query to Exile about "Did the Bene sink, or did it make it in to port just fine?": After the crew from the trawler helped cut away the fallen mast and sails, they towed the Bene into the marina at Yamba. It was making water at a great rate, but the pumps and buckets kept it afloat until it was jerked from the water. Is that "just fine"? I dunno, but I bet that the owner and crew of the Bene would have been happier if the splits in the hull had stopped shorter and not let in so much water.

Thanks for all the pictures of nice boats and small ships in dire straits. Now tell us what their point was in this discussion. Were these vessels involved in collisions? Or did their rudders fall off, this leading to colliding with the shore? What did the yard guys have to say about them?

Finally, you are correct to question my cruising abilities, for I'm only a beginner. How about you?

Jim

I made the mistake of using the general "you" in my replies to you and Exile. That's not what I meant.

When I typed "if you hit boats..." etc, I wasn't implying that YOU hit boats. I certainly assume that you don't. I meant it as "if one hits boats..." etc. So, I'll try to be more clear on those details. I didn't mean it the way you took it.

Apart from that - I'm providing another side of this argument. The ONLY thing I've called out in this thread are conclusions about what is being shown in some of these photos.

In other words, to conclude from the Bene/trawler pics that Benes are dangerously underbuilt makes no sense whatsoever. For me to say I personally don't buy that conclusion takes no "credibility" whatsoever. There are far too many of these boats out there doing very well to simply believe this at face value.

So - my disbelief may upset you guys, but I can't help that. I'm not going to believe something just because someone says it - regardless of who they are.

As to the photos, those were intended to show that ANY boat (even "well-built" ones with "heavy lay-ups") can and will sustain catastrophic damage in a serious collision or grounding. Trying to make a generalized distinction is actually very dangerous for new boat buyers who might think they can ram a trawler in their 1975 HalbergRico and carry on as if nothing happened - or, worse, one who thinks they can buy one that has been through something like that and just "fix it up".

[Island Time O25]

Also somehow most people understand that Geo Metro or Kia something were not built for desert rallies unless seriously modified and soupped up. Yet many people expect their equivalent or a Chevy Mailbu to perform as an army truck or a military Jeep in the bush. That's I think where all the negatives about average production boats come from. Just as Geo Metro is a fine car for a city person a Hunter or Bene is fine for your average coastal cruiser or Caribbean charterer. Not sure about taking unmodified Hanse even across Atlantic, never mind on a world cruise. Would want a few helmets on board for those sharp corners.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

Not sure about taking unmodified Hanse even across Atlantic, never mind on a world cruise.

You might not. But there are plenty of them out there doing it.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

You might not. But there are plenty of them out there doing it.

Two years ago I met I guy sailing around the world in almost new Hanse 54. Not his boat he's just skippering it for the investor owner and taking paid charterers on, etc. Anyway, since that time he replaced (not repaired - replaced) a rudder three times (!), two of which were definitely not his fault, as the hardware failed technically and/or rudder delaminated severely, and 3rd time is open to interpretation. Not to mention a lot of other stuff which he had to replace on the fly as he realized some 1,000s of miles in the middle of nowhere that the boat was not set up for serious cruising. And that's a 54 footer. Do you think they make their 40footers any better? Now I understand that people will say that even a new boat needs to be "beefed up" before a world cruise, etc. May be, especially if that boat is marketed as a coastal cruiser. But if it is marketed as "blue water boat", IMO, it must be a blue water boat from the get go. Otherwise it will be just like the fake SUVs of many manufacturers when they slap an SUV body on a sedan frame and then are suprised why their "SUVs" are not doing that well in the bush.