On Dec 14, 12:52*am,
Frogwatch wrote:
So, no evidence that gel coat blisters are EVER a structural or safety
issue ...

Interesting way to phrase it. Are we totally 100% sure that these are
"merely" gelcoat blisters? The presence of blisters warrants further
investigation; without thorough examination it can't be stated there
is no structural issue.


... and evidence that their presence is insignificant to anybody
except the most rabid racer and the stated opinions of surveyors that
blisters going deeper is extremely rare.

A surveyor who stated that would be incorrect. Gelcoat blisters can
turn into laminate blisters (or they might not, it's true) and
laminate blisters can very definitely be a structural problem. It's
not all that rare, I've seen a few cases without going out of my way
to look.


.... *On the same basis, I posit
that boats made in the month of June are bad and should be avoided.
Get real people, this is a well used 30' boat intended to be a cheap
cruiser.

Yeah but a cheap boat that "just needs some TLC" can end up being a
very expensive boat if you need to pay somebody else to fix it up.
Even if you have the skills to most of the work yourself, it can be
very costly to undertake a lot of kinds of work.

Wayne.B wrote:
That said, everything else being equal, I think most of us would agree
that a boat without blisters is worth more. *Certainly blisters are a
perfectly valid negotiating point, as well as being a red flag for the
surveyor to do a more thorough hull analysis with soundings and a
moisture meter.

Bingo. It all hanges on the exact condition of the boat and how much
comes off the price.