For you experts:: if a boat has a few,, blisters in the gel below
water line, forward toward the bow ??

Is this a "run away fast" boat?

Or,, are the blisters a fix it item.

Janet,
You will not really know if the blisters are behind the gel coat or within
the lamination until you open them up. Please examine them very closely to
deterime the ingress point of the water. Until these questions can be
answered, you really do not know the extent of the damage. For instance a
gelcoat blister is not an issue, but if the blister is actually in the
lamination, the damage can be very costly, even terminal.
Steve

"Janet O'Leary" wrote in message
...
For you experts:: if a boat has a few,, blisters in the gel below
water line, forward toward the bow ??

Is this a "run away fast" boat?

Or,, are the blisters a fix it item.

Dave wrote in
:

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:47:11 +0100, "Steve Lusardi"
said:

but if the blister is actually in the
lamination, the damage can be very costly, even terminal.

What is the basis for that conclusion? Personal observation? Sea
stories?


I've been around some kind of boats all my life. Before I started
having something to do with expensive motor and sailing yachts, I never
saw a blister on any old boat. That's a personal observation from over
50 years.

The part about "lamination" is also interesting, given manufacturing of
boats anyone can afford are done with a chopper gun in a mold, now, not
hand laid fiberglass for a decade or two. I don't ever remember seeing
a blister on the cheapest boats like Bayliner, but I suppose stuff
happens.

Should run faster full of blisters to roughen the surface and break
surface tension.

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:41:47 +0000, Larry wrote:

I don't ever remember seeing
a blister on the cheapest boats like Bayliner, but I suppose stuff
happens.

They typically fail from stringer or transom rot, sometimes decks,
floors or bulkheads.

Wayne.B wrote in
:

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:41:47 +0000, Larry wrote:

I don't ever remember seeing
a blister on the cheapest boats like Bayliner, but I suppose stuff
happens.

They typically fail from stringer or transom rot, sometimes decks,
floors or bulkheads.



Once again, we're all showing our ages by assuming, wrongly I believe, that
there ARE stringers and wooden transoms, which I don't think is the case
any more with that chopper gun spraying into the mold. When I was watching
him do it, here, I didn't see any wood to rot at all!

They were wood when we had that wonderful hand laid fiberglass we were
taught was of such high quality....which it obviously wasn't as it rotted.

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:33:52 +0000, Larry wrote:

Wayne.B wrote in
:

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:41:47 +0000, Larry wrote:

I don't ever remember seeing
a blister on the cheapest boats like Bayliner, but I suppose stuff
happens.

They typically fail from stringer or transom rot, sometimes decks,
floors or bulkheads.



Once again, we're all showing our ages by assuming, wrongly I believe, that
there ARE stringers and wooden transoms, which I don't think is the case
any more with that chopper gun spraying into the mold. When I was watching
him do it, here, I didn't see any wood to rot at all!

They were wood when we had that wonderful hand laid fiberglass we were
taught was of such high quality....which it obviously wasn't as it rotted.

Plenty of boats are hand-laid glass.
The lowly Mac 26 for one.
They still have balsa too, I think, but there are boats now using
non-rotting composites for transoms/stringers.
Ranger for one, I believe, maybe Carolina Skiff.
Chopper-guns are avoided by quality boat makers.
It pays to know how any boat you're considering was put together.
Balsa/plywood rot is a hell of a lot more serious problem than
blisters.
That's what I've read, anyway. Never saw a boat blister in person.

--Vic

Dave,
My observations over many years are the basis of my opinion. For your
benefit, my definition of "Terminal" is beyond economical repair. Blisters
below the Gelcoat can be very costly to resolve. When buying a glass boat as
Janet is, the presence of blisters should immediately turn her off. Unless
of course, the offered price makes the gamble of serious repair expense
feasible. The question she has to ask is, does she want a fiberglass hobby
or a sail boat she will sail. There are many variables here, like recurrence
in the same area or even elsewhere. Blister repairs are often unsuccessful
and if for no other reason, seriously affects the resale value of her
investment. She also has to consider today's economic climate. As much as it
is distasteful to the readers of this NG, it is a fact that many boats will
come on the market at extremely low prices and she will have much more
choice. There is no reason to take on this problem to a potential buyer with
cash.
Steve

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:47:11 +0100, "Steve Lusardi"

said:

but if the blister is actually in the
lamination, the damage can be very costly, even terminal.

What is the basis for that conclusion? Personal observation? Sea stories?

On 13 Dec 2008 12:25:01 -0600, Dave wrote:

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:07:19 +0100, "Steve Lusardi"
said:

My observations over many years are the basis of my opinion. For your
benefit, my definition of "Terminal" is beyond economical repair.

Ah, the old Humpty Dumpty game. "When I use a word it means just what I
choose it to mean..." A technique frequently encountered when the speaker
recognizes his error but is unwilling to acknowledge it.

Give it up Dave. Steve knows a heck of a lot more about boats than
you do.

On Dec 13, 6:58 pm, Dave wrote:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 16:02:49 -0500, Wayne.B
said:

Ah, the old Humpty Dumpty game. "When I use a word it means just what I
choose it to mean..." A technique frequently encountered when the speaker
recognizes his error but is unwilling to acknowledge it.

Give it up Dave. Steve knows a heck of a lot more about boats than
you do.

Perhaps true. Perhaps not. The question here is whether he clearly
communicated such knowledge as he has. I know a heck of a lot more about
clear communication that Steve does, and based on that knowledge, as well as
the responses that followed his post, his choice of "terminal" did not
clearly communicate "unduly expensive to repair."

So, no evidence that gel coat blisters are EVER a structural or safety
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. 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.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:57:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch
wrote:

So, no evidence that gel coat blisters are EVER a structural or safety
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. 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.

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.