"cavelamb" wrote in message
...
Hi Steve,

I'm trying to figure out how to make a toy, and need a bit of help
this time.

This is a Tiller Trim for my sailboat.l
The idea is to lock the tiller down so I can go do something else
for a few moments without the boat heading for the nearest land mass
or other obstruction.

Richard, I haven't read this whole thread so forgive me if I'm repeating
something, but have you ever tried the time-tested method of undersheeting
the main and slightly oversheeting the jib, and then just tying off the
tiller with a line tied to a cleat?

My Typhoon would sail itself for quite a while that way, until the wind
shifted. If you undersheet the main a bit, the jib will tend to make the
boat fall off the wind, until the main fills and weathervanes you back
upwind.

The Typhoon, as you probably know, has a 3/4 keel, so it's inherently more
stable than a fin-keel boat. But if your boat is well-balanced, it should
work to some degree. If you only need to be hands-free for "a few moments,"
it ought to work. It's worth a try, anyway. Don't try it with a Genoa or the
jib will just drive you off the wind. If you have a storm jib or a roller
jib reefed a bit, that might work best.

--
Ed Huntress

Hi Ed,

The Typhoon is a sweet little ship.
Was yours the day sailer or cabin job?


Close hauled or broad reaching, my 26 can steer herself - providing the rudder
is tied down and not free to swing back and forth.

That's accomplished by trimming for a neutral helm - in this case, slightly
under sheeting the jib, or over sheeting the main - either way works.
I prefer to over sheet the main rather than letting the jib luff (and flog!?)

And that works pretty well for a shoal draft wing keeled boat.
It wanders a few degrees back and forth, but generally stays where you put
it.

I've been mostly just tying the tiller down with a piece of line to the stern
rails. Two loops around the tiller - pulled tight - will hold it under moderate
conditions - and has just about worn a ring through the varnish there.

The down side is that it takes time and attention to set up.

I often sail solo (during the week while the rest of the world has to work )
so something that can just drop in place without having to be rigged would be
a blessing.

The autopilot (Otto) is pure temptation, but it takes power (and has to
have the GPS up and running for compass information) and it takes time to
acquire and set up. Operating it manually - bump the buttons back and forth
trying to set it where you want it also takes time and attention and somewhat
frustrating trying to make fine adjustments.

So mostly, I've just tied off and not bothered with it unless I have plenty
of sea room and need to be away from the helm for more than a few seconds.

But once set on course, Otto can be turned completely off and still hold steady!

So what I've thought all summer is - what if I had a simple manual jack screw
that would drop in place of Otto?

But my mental image was just that - a direct replacement of the electrical
device. One end of which would need a pretty tight tolerance rotating thrust
bearing - hard to cobble up with bear claws and stone knives.

A few comments by clever people here replaced that with a (drum roll please)
turnbuckle!

It was just a matter of letting go of the obvious solution and allowing
a simpler one to take it's place...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Hi Ed,

The Typhoon is a sweet little ship.
Was yours the day sailer or cabin job?

Cabin. It slept four VERY friendly people. d8-)



Close hauled or broad reaching, my 26 can steer herself - providing the
rudder
is tied down and not free to swing back and forth.

That's accomplished by trimming for a neutral helm - in this case,
slightly
under sheeting the jib, or over sheeting the main - either way works.
I prefer to over sheet the main rather than letting the jib luff (and
flog!?)

Whatever works. The Typhoon has, roughly, a 7/8 rig, so it will behave
differently from a modern design that has more relative area in the jib.


And that works pretty well for a shoal draft wing keeled boat.
It wanders a few degrees back and forth, but generally stays where you put
it.

I've been mostly just tying the tiller down with a piece of line to the
stern
rails. Two loops around the tiller - pulled tight - will hold it under
moderate
conditions - and has just about worn a ring through the varnish there.

The down side is that it takes time and attention to set up.

I often sail solo (during the week while the rest of the world has to work
)
so something that can just drop in place without having to be rigged would
be
a blessing.

The autopilot (Otto) is pure temptation, but it takes power (and has to
have the GPS up and running for compass information) and it takes time to
acquire and set up. Operating it manually - bump the buttons back and
forth
trying to set it where you want it also takes time and attention and
somewhat
frustrating trying to make fine adjustments.

So mostly, I've just tied off and not bothered with it unless I have
plenty
of sea room and need to be away from the helm for more than a few seconds.

But once set on course, Otto can be turned completely off and still hold
steady!

So what I've thought all summer is - what if I had a simple manual jack
screw
that would drop in place of Otto?

But my mental image was just that - a direct replacement of the electrical
device. One end of which would need a pretty tight tolerance rotating
thrust
bearing - hard to cobble up with bear claws and stone knives.

A few comments by clever people here replaced that with a (drum roll
please)
turnbuckle!

It was just a matter of letting go of the obvious solution and allowing
a simpler one to take it's place...

I'll be interested to hear how it works. BTW, a friend of mine who had a
Ranger 26 sailed her solo all the way down the coast to Florida one year,
sailing mostly outside rather than in the Intracoastal Waterway, using a
tiny wind-vane self-steering rig that was so compact that he just left it in
place all the time, unhooking it when he wanted to man the tiller. Rather
than a vane, it was one of those "flapper" deals that had a near-horizontal
pivot axis, and a small flapper that hung just behind the transom. It has a
very large mechanical advantage over vane-type steering, although it's more
limited in the amount of tiller travel it can accomplish.

Those things can work very well. I'm leery of electro-mechanical systems on
a sailboat, anyway. Too much tech for me.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Hi Ed,

The Typhoon is a sweet little ship.
Was yours the day sailer or cabin job?

Cabin. It slept four VERY friendly people. d8-)



Close hauled or broad reaching, my 26 can steer herself - providing the
rudder
is tied down and not free to swing back and forth.

That's accomplished by trimming for a neutral helm - in this case,
slightly
under sheeting the jib, or over sheeting the main - either way works.
I prefer to over sheet the main rather than letting the jib luff (and
flog!?)

Whatever works. The Typhoon has, roughly, a 7/8 rig, so it will behave
differently from a modern design that has more relative area in the jib.


And that works pretty well for a shoal draft wing keeled boat.
It wanders a few degrees back and forth, but generally stays where you
put
it.

I've been mostly just tying the tiller down with a piece of line to the
stern
rails. Two loops around the tiller - pulled tight - will hold it under
moderate
conditions - and has just about worn a ring through the varnish there.

The down side is that it takes time and attention to set up.

I often sail solo (during the week while the rest of the world has to
work )
so something that can just drop in place without having to be rigged
would be
a blessing.

The autopilot (Otto) is pure temptation, but it takes power (and has to
have the GPS up and running for compass information) and it takes time to
acquire and set up. Operating it manually - bump the buttons back and
forth
trying to set it where you want it also takes time and attention and
somewhat
frustrating trying to make fine adjustments.

So mostly, I've just tied off and not bothered with it unless I have
plenty
of sea room and need to be away from the helm for more than a few
seconds.

But once set on course, Otto can be turned completely off and still hold
steady!

So what I've thought all summer is - what if I had a simple manual jack
screw
that would drop in place of Otto?

But my mental image was just that - a direct replacement of the
electrical
device. One end of which would need a pretty tight tolerance rotating
thrust
bearing - hard to cobble up with bear claws and stone knives.

A few comments by clever people here replaced that with a (drum roll
please)
turnbuckle!

It was just a matter of letting go of the obvious solution and allowing
a simpler one to take it's place...

I'll be interested to hear how it works. BTW, a friend of mine who had a
Ranger 26 sailed her solo all the way down the coast to Florida one year,
sailing mostly outside rather than in the Intracoastal Waterway, using a
tiny wind-vane self-steering rig that was so compact that he just left it
in place all the time, unhooking it when he wanted to man the tiller.
Rather than a vane, it was one of those "flapper" deals that had a
near-horizontal pivot axis, and a small flapper that hung just behind the
transom. It has a very large mechanical advantage over vane-type steering,
although it's more limited in the amount of tiller travel it can
accomplish.

Those things can work very well. I'm leery of electro-mechanical systems
on a sailboat, anyway. Too much tech for me.

--
Ed Huntress
Though we never tried it, I doubt that a wind vane type would work well on
our McGregor 36 Catamaran. The relative angle between the wind and the cat
changed as the cat made more and more wind. We would have killed for an
Otto on passages where we were required to helm the devil 24hrs/day for
several days. Great speed boat. Saw 22kts under sail with 5 people
standing around with drinks in their hands. One mono-huller that I know
still talks about that event. Miss sailing.....

Stu in the desert...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Hi Ed,

The Typhoon is a sweet little ship.
Was yours the day sailer or cabin job?

Cabin. It slept four VERY friendly people. d8-)



Close hauled or broad reaching, my 26 can steer herself - providing the
rudder
is tied down and not free to swing back and forth.

That's accomplished by trimming for a neutral helm - in this case,
slightly
under sheeting the jib, or over sheeting the main - either way works.
I prefer to over sheet the main rather than letting the jib luff (and
flog!?)

Whatever works. The Typhoon has, roughly, a 7/8 rig, so it will behave
differently from a modern design that has more relative area in the jib.


And that works pretty well for a shoal draft wing keeled boat.
It wanders a few degrees back and forth, but generally stays where you
put
it.

I've been mostly just tying the tiller down with a piece of line to the
stern
rails. Two loops around the tiller - pulled tight - will hold it under
moderate
conditions - and has just about worn a ring through the varnish there.

The down side is that it takes time and attention to set up.

I often sail solo (during the week while the rest of the world has to
work )
so something that can just drop in place without having to be rigged
would be
a blessing.

The autopilot (Otto) is pure temptation, but it takes power (and has to
have the GPS up and running for compass information) and it takes time
to
acquire and set up. Operating it manually - bump the buttons back and
forth
trying to set it where you want it also takes time and attention and
somewhat
frustrating trying to make fine adjustments.

So mostly, I've just tied off and not bothered with it unless I have
plenty
of sea room and need to be away from the helm for more than a few
seconds.

But once set on course, Otto can be turned completely off and still hold
steady!

So what I've thought all summer is - what if I had a simple manual jack
screw
that would drop in place of Otto?

But my mental image was just that - a direct replacement of the
electrical
device. One end of which would need a pretty tight tolerance rotating
thrust
bearing - hard to cobble up with bear claws and stone knives.

A few comments by clever people here replaced that with a (drum roll
please)
turnbuckle!

It was just a matter of letting go of the obvious solution and allowing
a simpler one to take it's place...

I'll be interested to hear how it works. BTW, a friend of mine who had a
Ranger 26 sailed her solo all the way down the coast to Florida one year,
sailing mostly outside rather than in the Intracoastal Waterway, using a
tiny wind-vane self-steering rig that was so compact that he just left it
in place all the time, unhooking it when he wanted to man the tiller.
Rather than a vane, it was one of those "flapper" deals that had a
near-horizontal pivot axis, and a small flapper that hung just behind the
transom. It has a very large mechanical advantage over vane-type
steering, although it's more limited in the amount of tiller travel it
can accomplish.

Those things can work very well. I'm leery of electro-mechanical systems
on a sailboat, anyway. Too much tech for me.

--
Ed Huntress
Though we never tried it, I doubt that a wind vane type would work well on
our McGregor 36 Catamaran. The relative angle between the wind and the
cat changed as the cat made more and more wind. We would have killed for
an Otto on passages where we were required to helm the devil 24hrs/day for
several days. Great speed boat. Saw 22kts under sail with 5 people
standing around with drinks in their hands. One mono-huller that I know
still talks about that event. Miss sailing.....

Stu in the desert...

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7 knots.
g

--
Ed Huntress

It was just a matter of letting go of the obvious solution and allowing
a simpler one to take it's place...

I'll be interested to hear how it works. BTW, a friend of mine who had a
Ranger 26 sailed her solo all the way down the coast to Florida one year,
sailing mostly outside rather than in the Intracoastal Waterway, using a
tiny wind-vane self-steering rig that was so compact that he just left it in
place all the time, unhooking it when he wanted to man the tiller. Rather
than a vane, it was one of those "flapper" deals that had a near-horizontal
pivot axis, and a small flapper that hung just behind the transom. It has a
very large mechanical advantage over vane-type steering, although it's more
limited in the amount of tiller travel it can accomplish.

Those things can work very well. I'm leery of electro-mechanical systems on
a sailboat, anyway. Too much tech for me.



I hear ya, brother, on that last part!

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7 knots.
g



Oh yes, Life in the Slow Lane...

How sweet it is!

"cavelamb" wrote in message
news
Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g



Oh yes, Life in the Slow Lane...

How sweet it is!

But you would heel over so far that it felt like you were flying. Slack
bilges, ya' know.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news
Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g

There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...


Oh yes, Life in the Slow Lane...

How sweet it is!

But you would heel over so far that it felt like you were flying. Slack
bilges, ya' know.


Those old yachts, styled after the "plank on edge" philosophy of the old
English channel cutters did that. They also have a strong affinity for the bottom!

All the boats I've ever owned have been more of the modern hard bilged
designs. More of a flat bottom - corky, is the expression, I believe.
Floats up on top of the water more than down in it.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:55:34 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news
Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g

There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

That boat would sell for between $1500 and $2500 here in
California..BEFORE the recession. I paid $1600 for my Ensenada 20, and
I over paid.

One sees less than 10 yrs old McGregor 24s for $3k




Oh yes, Life in the Slow Lane...

How sweet it is!

But you would heel over so far that it felt like you were flying. Slack
bilges, ya' know.


Those old yachts, styled after the "plank on edge" philosophy of the old
English channel cutters did that. They also have a strong affinity for the bottom!

All the boats I've ever owned have been more of the modern hard bilged
designs. More of a flat bottom - corky, is the expression, I believe.
Floats up on top of the water more than down in it.



IMHO, some people here give Jeff far more attention than he deserves,
but obviously craves. The most appropriate response, and perhaps the
cruelest, IMO, is to simply killfile and ignore him. An alternative, if
you must, would be to post the same standard reply to his every post,
listing the manifold reasons why he ought to be ignored. Just my $0.02
worth.

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:55:34 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g
There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

That boat would sell for between $1500 and $2500 here in
California..BEFORE the recession. I paid $1600 for my Ensenada 20, and
I over paid.

One sees less than 10 yrs old McGregor 24s for $3k


Excuse me?

You just compared a Cape Dory Typhoon to a McGregor 24?

Man, you MUST be in California!

On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 01:06:25 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:55:34 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g
There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

That boat would sell for between $1500 and $2500 here in
California..BEFORE the recession. I paid $1600 for my Ensenada 20, and
I over paid.

One sees less than 10 yrs old McGregor 24s for $3k


Excuse me?

You just compared a Cape Dory Typhoon to a McGregor 24?

Man, you MUST be in California!

Yes..I did. They are both boats that are driven by sails. One is
considered a Classic to those that want to drive a 1934 Studebaker. The
other is a working sailboat that goes much faster, is less maintainence
prone and doesnt weigh as much as the port quarter of the Queen Mary.

Gunner

"IMHO, some people here give Jeff far more attention than he deserves,
but obviously craves. The most appropriate response, and perhaps the
cruelest, IMO, is to simply killfile and ignore him. An alternative, if
you must, would be to post the same standard reply to his every post,
listing the manifold reasons why he ought to be ignored. Just my $0.02
worth."

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news
Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g

There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her in
the water.


This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive boats.
But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their lifetime is related
to hull thickness raised to some positive exponent: twice as thick, lasts 10
times as long, or something like that. My dad's Boston Whaler Nausset, for
example, which he bought in 1962 and used heavily, was just as solid when he
sold it in 1984. And Cape Dories are heavily built -- like the Boston
Whalers of sailboats.



Oh yes, Life in the Slow Lane...

How sweet it is!

But you would heel over so far that it felt like you were flying. Slack
bilges, ya' know.


Those old yachts, styled after the "plank on edge" philosophy of the old
English channel cutters did that. They also have a strong affinity for
the bottom!

Make sure you keep the hatches closed. d8-)


All the boats I've ever owned have been more of the modern hard bilged
designs. More of a flat bottom - corky, is the expression, I believe.
Floats up on top of the water more than down in it.

--
Ed Huntress

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:55:34 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g

There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

That boat would sell for between $1500 and $2500 here in
California..BEFORE the recession. I paid $1600 for my Ensenada 20, and
I over paid.

One sees less than 10 yrs old McGregor 24s for $3k

And they're overpriced at that -- as is an Ensenada.

Cape Dories are not something that West Coast sailors would normally get
excited about. They're very much a New England boat, and they sell for twice
as much, or more, as ordinary boats of comparable size. Think Boston Whaler.
Or Black Watch, if you're into bigger power boats.

Having built both Cals and Rangers (I worked for Ranger Yachts after my
first machine shop experience), I can assure you that there is no comparison
between boats like that and a Typhoon, in terms of quality and longevity. A
Cal, or an Ensenada, will get punky and the hull will get all fatigued and
floppy before a Cape Dory even needs a fresh coat of paint.

Another sailboat built like the Dory is a Stone Pony. I doubt if you ever
saw many of those out there, either.


Oh yes, Life in the Slow Lane...

How sweet it is!

But you would heel over so far that it felt like you were flying. Slack
bilges, ya' know.


Those old yachts, styled after the "plank on edge" philosophy of the old
English channel cutters did that. They also have a strong affinity for
the bottom!

All the boats I've ever owned have been more of the modern hard bilged
designs. More of a flat bottom - corky, is the expression, I believe.
Floats up on top of the water more than down in it.



IMHO, some people here give Jeff far more attention than he deserves,
but obviously craves. The most appropriate response, and perhaps the
cruelest, IMO, is to simply killfile and ignore him. An alternative, if
you must, would be to post the same standard reply to his every post,
listing the manifold reasons why he ought to be ignored. Just my $0.02
worth.

Where the hell did *that* come from?

--
Ed Huntress

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 01:06:25 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:55:34 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"cavelamb" wrote in message
news Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g
There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

That boat would sell for between $1500 and $2500 here in
California..BEFORE the recession. I paid $1600 for my Ensenada 20, and
I over paid.

One sees less than 10 yrs old McGregor 24s for $3k


Excuse me?

You just compared a Cape Dory Typhoon to a McGregor 24?

Man, you MUST be in California!

Yes..I did. They are both boats that are driven by sails. One is
considered a Classic to those that want to drive a 1934 Studebaker. The
other is a working sailboat that goes much faster, is less maintainence
prone and doesnt weigh as much as the port quarter of the Queen Mary.

Gunner

A McGregor is a toy boat built for people who buy their boats by the foot,
or their cars by the pound. A Cape Dory is built by people who know what
quality is, and why it's worth it.

They aren't even in the same league.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her in
the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive boats.
But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their lifetime is related
to hull thickness raised to some positive exponent: twice as thick, lasts 10
times as long, or something like that. My dad's Boston Whaler Nausset, for
example, which he bought in 1962 and used heavily, was just as solid when he
sold it in 1984. And Cape Dories are heavily built -- like the Boston
Whalers of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before it get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her in
the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

The nice thing was that you could swing it out of the water, running, and
sling the seaweed off the prop without worrying about the engine
over-revving. g


This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their lifetime
is related to hull thickness raised to some positive exponent: twice as
thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like that. My dad's Boston
Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought in 1962 and used heavily,
was just as solid when he sold it in 1984. And Cape Dories are heavily
built -- like the Boston Whalers of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before it
get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

The extreme example is the very expensive International 14's made for
world-class racing. When they're made of polyester and E-glass, they have to
be replaced in the middle of the season because they're oilcanning and the
hulls are swaybacked from the stress of the stays.

Interestingly, the ones made of cold-laminated plywood last for many years.

--
Ed Huntress

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her in
the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their lifetime
is related to hull thickness raised to some positive exponent: twice as
thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like that. My dad's Boston
Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought in 1962 and used heavily,
was just as solid when he sold it in 1984. And Cape Dories are heavily
built -- like the Boston Whalers of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before it
get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a short
discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that works for Rutan's
Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the fatigue properties.
On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the Marshall
Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new. To my knowledge
both still float. They were basically unsinkable and had instructions for
self righting....which was demonstrated in calm water in which I couldn't
figure out why you would turn the boat over in the first place... The old
argument that their most stable state was inverted while true, beat the mono
hulls who's most stable state was on the bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out when we
were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an up grade. Boat
could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in groups of 4 sets of
Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the Cat.

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her
in the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their lifetime
is related to hull thickness raised to some positive exponent: twice as
thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like that. My dad's Boston
Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought in 1962 and used heavily,
was just as solid when he sold it in 1984. And Cape Dories are heavily
built -- like the Boston Whalers of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme
and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before it
get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a short
discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that works for
Rutan's Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the fatigue
properties.

It's been described by composites experts as an effect that results from
combining polyester resin and glass. The adhesive properties of polyester
are very poor -- much worse than most adhesives, and not in the same league
with epoxy, or even vinylester (which falls roughly between the two). If a
polyester/glass panel is thin or very flat and subject to flexing, as it is
in cheap boats, the adhesion progressively gives way and the panel loses its
stiffness. They try to compensate for this with the chrome finish on good
fiberlass cloth, but that's not a complete solution. And in mass-produced
boats, where they tend to go for a lot of "value engineering," they
typically push the envelope in terms of how much styrene they put in the
polyester. That makes the life of a hull even shorter.

Add to that the fact that polyester is not very water-resistant (especially
when its stretched with a lot of styrene), and the fact that water can wick
along individual glass fibers when the bonds start to break down between the
fibers and the polyester. A thin-hulled boat will get "soft" as a result of
all these factors. It isn't very noticeable in some boats, particularly
those that have strong compound curves, but a modern sailboat with hard
bilges and large flat areas will show the effect eventually. You notice a
progressive tendency for the hull to "oilcan" as you go over waves in a head
sea. That's usually the first sign.

On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the Marshall
Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new. To my knowledge
both still float. They were basically unsinkable and had instructions for
self righting....which was demonstrated in calm water in which I couldn't
figure out why you would turn the boat over in the first place... The old
argument that their most stable state was inverted while true, beat the
mono hulls who's most stable state was on the bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out when
we were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an up grade.
Boat could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in groups of 4
sets of Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the Cat.

Cheap cruising sailboats tend to show their weaknesses under extreme
conditions. Hardware usually goes first: chainplates pop out; shrouds tear
out at the eye fittings; gudgeons and pintles break; cleats snap off. A
yacht appraiser with blue-water experience could go through a boat and in
twenty minutes produce a list of what's going to fail under harsh
conditions.

But to be fair, very few sailboats are ever sailed in blue water, and even
fewer are subject to harsh conditions. If you want a daysailer or weekender
to putter around in nice weather, a lightly-built boat may be your best buy.
Just don't sail it to Tahiti. g

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of 4.7
knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her
in the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their lifetime
is related to hull thickness raised to some positive exponent: twice as
thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like that. My dad's Boston
Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought in 1962 and used heavily,
was just as solid when he sold it in 1984. And Cape Dories are heavily
built -- like the Boston Whalers of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to
cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over
compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule
to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme
and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before it
get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure
leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a short
discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that works for
Rutan's Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the fatigue
properties.

It's been described by composites experts as an effect that results from
combining polyester resin and glass. The adhesive properties of polyester
are very poor -- much worse than most adhesives, and not in the same
league with epoxy, or even vinylester (which falls roughly between the
two). If a polyester/glass panel is thin or very flat and subject to
flexing, as it is in cheap boats, the adhesion progressively gives way and
the panel loses its stiffness. They try to compensate for this with the
chrome finish on good fiberlass cloth, but that's not a complete solution.
And in mass-produced boats, where they tend to go for a lot of "value
engineering," they typically push the envelope in terms of how much
styrene they put in the polyester. That makes the life of a hull even
shorter.

Add to that the fact that polyester is not very water-resistant
(especially when its stretched with a lot of styrene), and the fact that
water can wick along individual glass fibers when the bonds start to break
down between the fibers and the polyester. A thin-hulled boat will get
"soft" as a result of all these factors. It isn't very noticeable in some
boats, particularly those that have strong compound curves, but a modern
sailboat with hard bilges and large flat areas will show the effect
eventually. You notice a progressive tendency for the hull to "oilcan" as
you go over waves in a head sea. That's usually the first sign.

On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the Marshall
Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new. To my
knowledge both still float. They were basically unsinkable and had
instructions for self righting....which was demonstrated in calm water in
which I couldn't figure out why you would turn the boat over in the first
place... The old argument that their most stable state was inverted
while true, beat the mono hulls who's most stable state was on the
bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out when
we were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an up grade.
Boat could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in groups of 4
sets of Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the Cat.

Cheap cruising sailboats tend to show their weaknesses under extreme
conditions. Hardware usually goes first: chainplates pop out; shrouds tear
out at the eye fittings; gudgeons and pintles break; cleats snap off. A
yacht appraiser with blue-water experience could go through a boat and in
twenty minutes produce a list of what's going to fail under harsh
conditions.

But to be fair, very few sailboats are ever sailed in blue water, and even
fewer are subject to harsh conditions. If you want a daysailer or
weekender to putter around in nice weather, a lightly-built boat may be
your best buy. Just don't sail it to Tahiti. g

--
Ed Huntress
Yep. Our dis-masting occurred because of a SS toggle that had a crack that
started inside the saddle portion and was not detected in a scrubbing and
clean up a few weeks before. We went to bronze larger toggles and up one
size on all rigging. No problems after that. While the Cat was sold as a
coastal cruiser, we were able to make some passages by paying attention to
the speed and waves. For some wave conditions like those found in the
"Majuro Washing Machine" 8' waves 100' apart, the speed had to be reduced
to under 10kts to avoid digging in one of the bows and risking pitch poling.
It did sail flat though. No rolls. It took a little time to get used to
the boat accelerating in gusts rather than heeling like our old fixed keel
monohull.
I've still got a box full of SS bolts, tangs and misc fittings parts of
winches etc. Maybe someday I'll get done with the helicopters and go back
to something more tranquil...
Stu

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of
4.7 knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept her
in the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their
lifetime is related to hull thickness raised to some positive
exponent: twice as thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like
that. My dad's Boston Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought in
1962 and used heavily, was just as solid when he sold it in 1984. And
Cape Dories are heavily built -- like the Boston Whalers of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to
cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew
much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over
compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule
to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme
and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before it
get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure
leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a short
discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that works for
Rutan's Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the fatigue
properties.

It's been described by composites experts as an effect that results from
combining polyester resin and glass. The adhesive properties of polyester
are very poor -- much worse than most adhesives, and not in the same
league with epoxy, or even vinylester (which falls roughly between the
two). If a polyester/glass panel is thin or very flat and subject to
flexing, as it is in cheap boats, the adhesion progressively gives way
and the panel loses its stiffness. They try to compensate for this with
the chrome finish on good fiberlass cloth, but that's not a complete
solution. And in mass-produced boats, where they tend to go for a lot of
"value engineering," they typically push the envelope in terms of how
much styrene they put in the polyester. That makes the life of a hull
even shorter.

Add to that the fact that polyester is not very water-resistant
(especially when its stretched with a lot of styrene), and the fact that
water can wick along individual glass fibers when the bonds start to
break down between the fibers and the polyester. A thin-hulled boat will
get "soft" as a result of all these factors. It isn't very noticeable in
some boats, particularly those that have strong compound curves, but a
modern sailboat with hard bilges and large flat areas will show the
effect eventually. You notice a progressive tendency for the hull to
"oilcan" as you go over waves in a head sea. That's usually the first
sign.

On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the Marshall
Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new. To my
knowledge both still float. They were basically unsinkable and had
instructions for self righting....which was demonstrated in calm water
in which I couldn't figure out why you would turn the boat over in the
first place... The old argument that their most stable state was
inverted while true, beat the mono hulls who's most stable state was on
the bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out when
we were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an up
grade. Boat could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in
groups of 4 sets of Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the Cat.

Cheap cruising sailboats tend to show their weaknesses under extreme
conditions. Hardware usually goes first: chainplates pop out; shrouds
tear out at the eye fittings; gudgeons and pintles break; cleats snap
off. A yacht appraiser with blue-water experience could go through a boat
and in twenty minutes produce a list of what's going to fail under harsh
conditions.

But to be fair, very few sailboats are ever sailed in blue water, and
even fewer are subject to harsh conditions. If you want a daysailer or
weekender to putter around in nice weather, a lightly-built boat may be
your best buy. Just don't sail it to Tahiti. g

--
Ed Huntress
Yep. Our dis-masting occurred because of a SS toggle that had a crack
that started inside the saddle portion and was not detected in a scrubbing
and clean up a few weeks before. We went to bronze larger toggles and up
one size on all rigging. No problems after that. While the Cat was sold
as a coastal cruiser, we were able to make some passages by paying
attention to the speed and waves. For some wave conditions like those
found in the "Majuro Washing Machine" 8' waves 100' apart, the speed had
to be reduced to under 10kts to avoid digging in one of the bows and
risking pitch poling. It did sail flat though. No rolls. It took a
little time to get used to the boat accelerating in gusts rather than
heeling like our old fixed keel monohull.
I've still got a box full of SS bolts, tangs and misc fittings parts of
winches etc. Maybe someday I'll get done with the helicopters and go back
to something more tranquil...
Stu

I envy you that trip, Stu. It sounds like great fun.

Regarding stainless on a sailboat, I'm wary of it for any application where
it's continually stressed, as in standing rigging, especially if the bits
and pieces are bent or take a sharp bending load. Most stainless is subject
to stress-corrosion cracking. Unless you can be sure you're dealing with
316, it's a risk.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of
4.7 knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the current
reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although my price
included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer. I kept
her in the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their
lifetime is related to hull thickness raised to some positive
exponent: twice as thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like
that. My dad's Boston Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought in
1962 and used heavily, was just as solid when he sold it in 1984. And
Cape Dories are heavily built -- like the Boston Whalers of
sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to
cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew
much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over
compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate schedule
to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to extreme
and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before
it get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure
leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a short
discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that works for
Rutan's Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the fatigue
properties.

It's been described by composites experts as an effect that results
from combining polyester resin and glass. The adhesive properties of
polyester are very poor -- much worse than most adhesives, and not in
the same league with epoxy, or even vinylester (which falls roughly
between the two). If a polyester/glass panel is thin or very flat and
subject to flexing, as it is in cheap boats, the adhesion progressively
gives way and the panel loses its stiffness. They try to compensate for
this with the chrome finish on good fiberlass cloth, but that's not a
complete solution. And in mass-produced boats, where they tend to go for
a lot of "value engineering," they typically push the envelope in terms
of how much styrene they put in the polyester. That makes the life of a
hull even shorter.

Add to that the fact that polyester is not very water-resistant
(especially when its stretched with a lot of styrene), and the fact that
water can wick along individual glass fibers when the bonds start to
break down between the fibers and the polyester. A thin-hulled boat will
get "soft" as a result of all these factors. It isn't very noticeable in
some boats, particularly those that have strong compound curves, but a
modern sailboat with hard bilges and large flat areas will show the
effect eventually. You notice a progressive tendency for the hull to
"oilcan" as you go over waves in a head sea. That's usually the first
sign.

On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the Marshall
Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new. To my
knowledge both still float. They were basically unsinkable and had
instructions for self righting....which was demonstrated in calm water
in which I couldn't figure out why you would turn the boat over in the
first place... The old argument that their most stable state was
inverted while true, beat the mono hulls who's most stable state was on
the bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out
when we were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an up
grade. Boat could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in
groups of 4 sets of Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the Cat.

Cheap cruising sailboats tend to show their weaknesses under extreme
conditions. Hardware usually goes first: chainplates pop out; shrouds
tear out at the eye fittings; gudgeons and pintles break; cleats snap
off. A yacht appraiser with blue-water experience could go through a
boat and in twenty minutes produce a list of what's going to fail under
harsh conditions.

But to be fair, very few sailboats are ever sailed in blue water, and
even fewer are subject to harsh conditions. If you want a daysailer or
weekender to putter around in nice weather, a lightly-built boat may be
your best buy. Just don't sail it to Tahiti. g

--
Ed Huntress
Yep. Our dis-masting occurred because of a SS toggle that had a crack
that started inside the saddle portion and was not detected in a
scrubbing and clean up a few weeks before. We went to bronze larger
toggles and up one size on all rigging. No problems after that. While
the Cat was sold as a coastal cruiser, we were able to make some passages
by paying attention to the speed and waves. For some wave conditions
like those found in the "Majuro Washing Machine" 8' waves 100' apart,
the speed had to be reduced to under 10kts to avoid digging in one of the
bows and risking pitch poling. It did sail flat though. No rolls. It
took a little time to get used to the boat accelerating in gusts rather
than heeling like our old fixed keel monohull.
I've still got a box full of SS bolts, tangs and misc fittings parts of
winches etc. Maybe someday I'll get done with the helicopters and go
back to something more tranquil...
Stu

I envy you that trip, Stu. It sounds like great fun.

Regarding stainless on a sailboat, I'm wary of it for any application
where it's continually stressed, as in standing rigging, especially if the
bits and pieces are bent or take a sharp bending load. Most stainless is
subject to stress-corrosion cracking. Unless you can be sure you're
dealing with 316, it's a risk.

--
Ed Huntress

Yes in the Marshal Island where we sailed, the 304 SS would corrode... It
was 316SS or nothing. The constant warm salty air would corrode Pyrex....

If you look at the pictures on the back of Yachting and Sailing magazines,
we did that every week-end for several years. We chartered our boat to
different visitors at rates varying from: You furnish the beer, to standard
charter rates. The scuba diving and snorkeling was so good that we
considered Hawaii second class. We had sharks on 95% of the dives and
learned to chase them with a camera. They didn't like our agressive
behavior very much. This was true even at night.
I'm not sure why we came back....

Stu

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of
4.7 knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the
current reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it, although
my price included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but no trailer.
I kept her in the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their
lifetime is related to hull thickness raised to some positive
exponent: twice as thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like
that. My dad's Boston Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought
in 1962 and used heavily, was just as solid when he sold it in 1984.
And Cape Dories are heavily built -- like the Boston Whalers of
sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to
cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew
much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over
compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate
schedule to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to
extreme and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before
it get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure
leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a
short discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that works
for Rutan's Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the fatigue
properties.

It's been described by composites experts as an effect that results
from combining polyester resin and glass. The adhesive properties of
polyester are very poor -- much worse than most adhesives, and not in
the same league with epoxy, or even vinylester (which falls roughly
between the two). If a polyester/glass panel is thin or very flat and
subject to flexing, as it is in cheap boats, the adhesion progressively
gives way and the panel loses its stiffness. They try to compensate for
this with the chrome finish on good fiberlass cloth, but that's not a
complete solution. And in mass-produced boats, where they tend to go
for a lot of "value engineering," they typically push the envelope in
terms of how much styrene they put in the polyester. That makes the
life of a hull even shorter.

Add to that the fact that polyester is not very water-resistant
(especially when its stretched with a lot of styrene), and the fact
that water can wick along individual glass fibers when the bonds start
to break down between the fibers and the polyester. A thin-hulled boat
will get "soft" as a result of all these factors. It isn't very
noticeable in some boats, particularly those that have strong compound
curves, but a modern sailboat with hard bilges and large flat areas
will show the effect eventually. You notice a progressive tendency for
the hull to "oilcan" as you go over waves in a head sea. That's usually
the first sign.

On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the
Marshall Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new. To
my knowledge both still float. They were basically unsinkable and had
instructions for self righting....which was demonstrated in calm water
in which I couldn't figure out why you would turn the boat over in the
first place... The old argument that their most stable state was
inverted while true, beat the mono hulls who's most stable state was
on the bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out
when we were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an
up grade. Boat could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in
groups of 4 sets of Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the Cat.

Cheap cruising sailboats tend to show their weaknesses under extreme
conditions. Hardware usually goes first: chainplates pop out; shrouds
tear out at the eye fittings; gudgeons and pintles break; cleats snap
off. A yacht appraiser with blue-water experience could go through a
boat and in twenty minutes produce a list of what's going to fail under
harsh conditions.

But to be fair, very few sailboats are ever sailed in blue water, and
even fewer are subject to harsh conditions. If you want a daysailer or
weekender to putter around in nice weather, a lightly-built boat may be
your best buy. Just don't sail it to Tahiti. g

--
Ed Huntress
Yep. Our dis-masting occurred because of a SS toggle that had a crack
that started inside the saddle portion and was not detected in a
scrubbing and clean up a few weeks before. We went to bronze larger
toggles and up one size on all rigging. No problems after that. While
the Cat was sold as a coastal cruiser, we were able to make some
passages by paying attention to the speed and waves. For some wave
conditions like those found in the "Majuro Washing Machine" 8' waves
100' apart, the speed had to be reduced to under 10kts to avoid digging
in one of the bows and risking pitch poling. It did sail flat though.
No rolls. It took a little time to get used to the boat accelerating in
gusts rather than heeling like our old fixed keel monohull.
I've still got a box full of SS bolts, tangs and misc fittings parts of
winches etc. Maybe someday I'll get done with the helicopters and go
back to something more tranquil...
Stu

I envy you that trip, Stu. It sounds like great fun.

Regarding stainless on a sailboat, I'm wary of it for any application
where it's continually stressed, as in standing rigging, especially if
the bits and pieces are bent or take a sharp bending load. Most stainless
is subject to stress-corrosion cracking. Unless you can be sure you're
dealing with 316, it's a risk.

--
Ed Huntress

Yes in the Marshal Island where we sailed, the 304 SS would corrode... It
was 316SS or nothing. The constant warm salty air would corrode
Pyrex....

If you look at the pictures on the back of Yachting and Sailing magazines,
we did that every week-end for several years. We chartered our boat to
different visitors at rates varying from: You furnish the beer, to
standard charter rates. The scuba diving and snorkeling was so good that
we considered Hawaii second class. We had sharks on 95% of the dives and
learned to chase them with a camera. They didn't like our agressive
behavior very much. This was true even at night.
I'm not sure why we came back....

Stu

Man, that sounds like the life I had planned for myself at age 20. You must
have some great memories.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:

I miss sailing, too, even though my Typhoon had a hull speed of
4.7 knots. g


Get your sagging asymmetrical ass up off that chair and go sail!


There is a real simple solution to that major problem, Ed.

http://www.sailingtexas.com/scapedory18108.html

Pay for a U-Haul and I'd even offer to bring her to you!

Very interesting! That's the same year I bought mine. And the
current reduced price is almost exactly what I paid for it,
although my price included a Seagull Silver Century outboard, but
no trailer. I kept her in the water.


I had a Seagull 5 horse once upon a time.
Seriously interesting little motors.
Damned thing had a five blade prop and would push a freighter, given
time to accelerate. Not very fast, but a good solid shove.

This one has been on Sailing Texas for over a year - maybe two.
I don't know if that means he's asking too much and won't be
reasonable?
Or ? But she sure looks sweet to me...

I don't know what the current prices are. Cape Dories are expensive
boats. But you know the story with old fiberglass boats: their
lifetime is related to hull thickness raised to some positive
exponent: twice as thick, lasts 10 times as long, or something like
that. My dad's Boston Whaler Nausset, for example, which he bought
in 1962 and used heavily, was just as solid when he sold it in
1984. And Cape Dories are heavily built -- like the Boston Whalers
of sailboats.

Prices, on old boats like this mainly depend on condition and
desire.
The nicer it is, and the more you want it, the more it is likely to
cost.
Basically whatever the buyer and seller can agree on.

(break)

Part of that is progress.

Back when they first started building hulls with glass, nobody knew
much
about how it would work out. They heavily over built to over
compensate.
Some of those 60s and 70s boats probably qualify as ice breakers.

As the designers gained experience, they reduced the laminate
schedule to
reduce cost and weight. Some, like McGregor, took the idea to
extreme and
wound up at the bottom of the quality list.

Fiberglass tends to get strong enough to carry the loads long before
it get
stiff enough to retain its shape. And, as you pointed out, flexure
leads
to fatigue, and to eventual failure.

Don't understand the fatigue of fiberglass. That is a topic of a
short discussion that I had with a Senior composite analyst that
works for Rutan's Scaled Composites. He wasn't too sure about the
fatigue properties.

It's been described by composites experts as an effect that results
from combining polyester resin and glass. The adhesive properties of
polyester are very poor -- much worse than most adhesives, and not in
the same league with epoxy, or even vinylester (which falls roughly
between the two). If a polyester/glass panel is thin or very flat and
subject to flexing, as it is in cheap boats, the adhesion
progressively gives way and the panel loses its stiffness. They try to
compensate for this with the chrome finish on good fiberlass cloth,
but that's not a complete solution. And in mass-produced boats, where
they tend to go for a lot of "value engineering," they typically push
the envelope in terms of how much styrene they put in the polyester.
That makes the life of a hull even shorter.

Add to that the fact that polyester is not very water-resistant
(especially when its stretched with a lot of styrene), and the fact
that water can wick along individual glass fibers when the bonds start
to break down between the fibers and the polyester. A thin-hulled boat
will get "soft" as a result of all these factors. It isn't very
noticeable in some boats, particularly those that have strong compound
curves, but a modern sailboat with hard bilges and large flat areas
will show the effect eventually. You notice a progressive tendency for
the hull to "oilcan" as you go over waves in a head sea. That's
usually the first sign.

On another cast, there were two 36' McGregor Catamarans in the
Marshall Islands when we arrived in 86. These boats were not new.
To my knowledge both still float. They were basically unsinkable and
had instructions for self righting....which was demonstrated in calm
water in which I couldn't figure out why you would turn the boat over
in the first place... The old argument that their most stable state
was inverted while true, beat the mono hulls who's most stable state
was on the bottom.
However, the rigging was definitely not first class as we found out
when we were dismasted. Both the mast and shrouds needed and got an
up grade. Boat could sleep up to 8 people below decks if they were in
groups of 4 sets of Siamese twins.

Stu more than 1,000 miles of out of sight of land sailing on the
Cat.

Cheap cruising sailboats tend to show their weaknesses under extreme
conditions. Hardware usually goes first: chainplates pop out; shrouds
tear out at the eye fittings; gudgeons and pintles break; cleats snap
off. A yacht appraiser with blue-water experience could go through a
boat and in twenty minutes produce a list of what's going to fail
under harsh conditions.

But to be fair, very few sailboats are ever sailed in blue water, and
even fewer are subject to harsh conditions. If you want a daysailer or
weekender to putter around in nice weather, a lightly-built boat may
be your best buy. Just don't sail it to Tahiti. g

--
Ed Huntress
Yep. Our dis-masting occurred because of a SS toggle that had a crack
that started inside the saddle portion and was not detected in a
scrubbing and clean up a few weeks before. We went to bronze larger
toggles and up one size on all rigging. No problems after that. While
the Cat was sold as a coastal cruiser, we were able to make some
passages by paying attention to the speed and waves. For some wave
conditions like those found in the "Majuro Washing Machine" 8' waves
100' apart, the speed had to be reduced to under 10kts to avoid digging
in one of the bows and risking pitch poling. It did sail flat though.
No rolls. It took a little time to get used to the boat accelerating
in gusts rather than heeling like our old fixed keel monohull.
I've still got a box full of SS bolts, tangs and misc fittings parts of
winches etc. Maybe someday I'll get done with the helicopters and go
back to something more tranquil...
Stu

I envy you that trip, Stu. It sounds like great fun.

Regarding stainless on a sailboat, I'm wary of it for any application
where it's continually stressed, as in standing rigging, especially if
the bits and pieces are bent or take a sharp bending load. Most
stainless is subject to stress-corrosion cracking. Unless you can be
sure you're dealing with 316, it's a risk.

--
Ed Huntress

Yes in the Marshal Island where we sailed, the 304 SS would corrode... It
was 316SS or nothing. The constant warm salty air would corrode
Pyrex....

If you look at the pictures on the back of Yachting and Sailing
magazines, we did that every week-end for several years. We chartered
our boat to different visitors at rates varying from: You furnish the
beer, to standard charter rates. The scuba diving and snorkeling was so
good that we considered Hawaii second class. We had sharks on 95% of the
dives and learned to chase them with a camera. They didn't like our
agressive behavior very much. This was true even at night.
I'm not sure why we came back....

Stu

Man, that sounds like the life I had planned for myself at age 20. You
must have some great memories.

--
Ed Huntress
Yeah we do. While we were doing it we would occasionally send a long
account back to our friends in the States. They suggested we make a book
out of it, but thats too much like work.
On another tack, with your experience and ability to write, the Asian
Development Bank has been hiring consultants to do various tasks in several
south sea island countries. They tagged me to write the Disaster Manual for
the Marshalls. When they asked me for my salary requirement, I dug up a
number that I thought was ridiculous because I didn't want to do the job.
They accepted. I found out later that I was the lowest paid consultant. I'm
sure that you could probably pickup a position. I was 55 at the time.
stu

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

Man, that sounds like the life I had planned for myself at age 20. You
must have some great memories.

--
Ed Huntress
Yeah we do. While we were doing it we would occasionally send a long
account back to our friends in the States. They suggested we make a book
out of it, but thats too much like work.
On another tack, with your experience and ability to write, the Asian
Development Bank has been hiring consultants to do various tasks in
several south sea island countries. They tagged me to write the Disaster
Manual for the Marshalls. When they asked me for my salary requirement, I
dug up a number that I thought was ridiculous because I didn't want to do
the job. They accepted. I found out later that I was the lowest paid
consultant. I'm sure that you could probably pickup a position. I was 55
at the time.
stu



LOL. wow. cool. amazing.
good luck ed.

b.w.