"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
I would certainly agree with 10 years in salt water although very
few people actually do. I can't remember seeing or hearing of a
dismasted coastal cruiser.

Any Great Lakes or other fresh water owners have recommendations
or dismastings to report?

--

Roger Long

Not answering your question - but attempting to put another
dimension into the discussion -

Most failures on properly designed rigs are due to metal fatigue
(agreed, often initiated by tiny corrosion weaknesses). So surely
the prudent timing of rig replacement will depend on the degree to
which the rig is over-designed? A point often ignored by insurers.

A European example which I know of is the difference between a
40ft Oyster and a 40ft Beneteau, both built around 1990, with
nearly identical masts. All the Oyster's main rigging was 10mm,
with intermediates of 8mm. The Beneteau used 8mm with 6mm
intermediates. The Oyster was advertised as a 'round the worlder',
the other as a 'performance cruiser'. My (unthinking) reaction
would be to life the Beneteau rigging at around 10 years, and give
the Oyster nearly twice that.

But then the mean streak in me came out. Instead I instituted a
regime of annual *close* inspection (most of the suitable
techniques have been aired already). Bottlescrew crack? See if
there's an obvious cause of the fault; if you can't find a cause,
replace them all. Strand gone? Search for obvious causes; if none,
replace all similarly stressed wires.

Under this regime all the Beneteau rigging was replaced between 8
and 12 years old (inner forestay twice). Most replacements were
initiated by strand failures at the bottom swage. The Oyster
changed a forestay at 10 years (yard damage bent the stay when the
mast was lowered, cracking a strand at the upper swage) and the
backstay sustained damage on a yacht lift. The inner forestay was
replaced twice - cracks at the lower swage. All bottlescrews
replaced. 25 years so far for caps and intermediates . . . I think
the new owner is replacing these for long term peace of mind!

I'm aware that the Oyster was about twice the displacement of the
Beneteau, so the inertia stresses on the Beneteau rigging would
have been higher (all that bouncing around!). So perhaps my
assumption about overdesign has been amplified in this case.

Whatever, my conclusions a

1. Nothing beats annual *close* inspection for checking rig safety
2. Corrosion initiates many failures (bottom swage faults most
common)
3. Your chances of suffering a fault are much higher on more
highly stressed rigs
4. The 'life' of a rig can be very long indeed if it is
understressed (under-use or overdesign)

So, thinking about all the rain we have in W Europe, my opinion
(untested) is that the fresh water issue is probably secondary
compared to the design issue.

JimB

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 11:29:13 -0500, prodigal1 wrote:

In another overly long thread about the merits of the C&C33, someone
mentioned rigging as a potential issue in an older boat. Would anyone
care to share experience with assessing the condition of rigging on a
freshwater-only sailboat? Look-fors? Tips? Sources of information?
Cheers and Happy 2006!
--only 16 weeks till launch day--

There's the obvious eyeball "tests" of looking for cracks, rust
weeping, deformation of holes, fraying wire, terminals with
suspiciously shiny wire, etc.

There's the dye tests. Interpreting those is a rigger's art.

There's the X-ray tests. Even more so.

I have 1/4" original (33 years) 7 x 19 standing rigging all around in
freshwater with good quality Merriman open turnbuckles which I inspect
and lube yearly. I eyeball the entire spar before launch, paying
particular attention to cotter pins, tangs, etc. My insurance company
isn't making a fuss, and the boat passes survey requirements.

I also inspect the chainplates and have replaced two bolts there in
six years. I can see a day when that job will have to be attended to:
there's a slight deformation in the hole in one plate...but I don't
race it and I reef early.

Even so, common sense and a sort of learned conservatism would say
that I should replace the lot (except the heavy and undamaged mast) in
the next five or less years. Certainly, the desire to have new sheaves
and to go to new all-rope halyards is part of that. At that time, I
will likely replace ALL chainplates, which is a big, nasty job, but it
will allow me to service and maybe reglass and retab all the
structural elements tying the plates to the hull.

Brion Toss's "Rigger's Companion" is great on all this stuff, or buy a
surveyor a few beers.

R.

rhys wrote:
snip
Brion Toss's "Rigger's Companion" is great on all this stuff, or buy a
surveyor a few beers.

Thanks Rhys and others. Our marina owner has been around boats all his
life and his take is that unless the wire is pulling out of the swages,
rigging doesn't stretch and doesn't need replacing for that reason. I'm
not sure I agree. I'm guessing the gear on mine is as old as the boat
(40 yrs. this year) It -looks- good, to my eye, but I'm not a surveyor.
My issue is with the inner starboard shroud which appears to have been
stretched. The mast is measured true, chainplates and swages appear
correct but the turnbuckle is tightened completely to the end of its
threads compared to the port side. No evidence of galling or
overtightening on the threads. Perhaps a poor measuring job sometime in
the past? I think I'm going to err on the side of caution and have it
all redone. I like the idea of new sheaves and rope halyards as well.

In article ,
prodigal1 wrote:

My issue is with the inner starboard shroud which appears to have
been stretched. The mast is measured true, chainplates and swages
appear correct but the turnbuckle is tightened completely to the end
of its threads compared to the port side. No evidence of galling or
overtightening on the threads. Perhaps a poor measuring job sometime
in the past?

If it's the only shroud, that's probably the case, though inspect the
upper attachment carefully.

I think I'm going to err on the side of caution and have it all
redone. I like the idea of new sheaves and rope halyards as well.

Sometimes, the comfort of knowing it's right is worth the cost.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

My 28' S2 was out of the water and the mast was down and I had no
intention of replacing the rigging even after 20 yrs cuz it looked ok
even on close inspection. However, I read an article in the BOATUS
insurance mag about rigging cracks so I got out my 10x magnifier and
looked even closer. Damn if I didnt find a crack in a SS fitting. I
looked more and used very fine sand paper to remove some brown stains.
Under these stains were cracks and the stains were where the SS had
become non-SS in the cracks. About half the fittings had cracks (20
yrs in salt water in FL). Next, i tried dye testing which showed
nothing even on the known cracks. Took the fittings to work where I
have more sophisticated equipment and looked at the fittings under
various Mag. Tried to grind out the cracks but they went all the way
through so they were real. I replaced all the standing rigging and
lifelines.

On 2 Jan 2006 17:30:17 -0800, wrote:

My 28' S2 was out of the water and the mast was down and I had no
intention of replacing the rigging even after 20 yrs cuz it looked ok
even on close inspection. However, I read an article in the BOATUS
insurance mag about rigging cracks so I got out my 10x magnifier and
looked even closer. Damn if I didnt find a crack in a SS fitting. I
looked more and used very fine sand paper to remove some brown stains.
Under these stains were cracks and the stains were where the SS had
become non-SS in the cracks. About half the fittings had cracks (20
yrs in salt water in FL). Next, i tried dye testing which showed
nothing even on the known cracks. Took the fittings to work where I
have more sophisticated equipment and looked at the fittings under
various Mag. Tried to grind out the cracks but they went all the way
through so they were real. I replaced all the standing rigging and
lifelines.

I doubt one out of ten recreational sailors would take an inspection
that far. The fact you did has probably saved you a nasty and
potentially dangerous episode.

Who carries bolt (shroud) cutters aboard? I do.

R.