That sounds scary. If you wait until there's an obvious flaw, you're sailing
on thin ice IMHO. The riggers out here say just the opposite... every ten
years is about right.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
A Great Lakes surveyor who seemed pretty knowledgeable told us that they
never replace standing rigging out there unless some noticeable flaw is
discovered.

Our 1980 boat was out there from at least 1984 until we brought it to
Maine last year and the rigging looks very good.

I'll let you know if the mast falls down.

--

Roger Long



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"prodigal1" wrote in message
...
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--

The same issues apply. Typically, out here in SF, you need to replace the
rigging after 10 years one way or another. I would assume it's the same
elsewhere, although with fresh water, you might be able to go a bit
longer. I wouldn't risk it, however.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

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



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
That sounds scary. If you wait until there's an obvious flaw, you're
sailing on thin ice IMHO. The riggers out here say just the
opposite... every ten years is about right.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
A Great Lakes surveyor who seemed pretty knowledgeable told us that
they never replace standing rigging out there unless some noticeable
flaw is discovered.

Our 1980 boat was out there from at least 1984 until we brought it
to Maine last year and the rigging looks very good.

I'll let you know if the mast falls down.

--

Roger Long



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"prodigal1" wrote in message
...
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--

The same issues apply. Typically, out here in SF, you need to
replace the rigging after 10 years one way or another. I would
assume it's the same elsewhere, although with fresh water, you
might be able to go a bit longer. I wouldn't risk it, however.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

No idea about reports... not my sailing area.

Out here, dismastings are not that uncommon. For example, we had a Catalina
27 that dismasted due to an almost invisible crack in a turnbuckle. I missed
it, our maintenance guy missed it (and he was really looking), and the
rigger missed it about six months before the rig went over. Fortunately, no
one was hurt and the insurance worked.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"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



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
That sounds scary. If you wait until there's an obvious flaw, you're
sailing on thin ice IMHO. The riggers out here say just the opposite...
every ten years is about right.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
A Great Lakes surveyor who seemed pretty knowledgeable told us that they
never replace standing rigging out there unless some noticeable flaw is
discovered.

Our 1980 boat was out there from at least 1984 until we brought it to
Maine last year and the rigging looks very good.

I'll let you know if the mast falls down.

--

Roger Long



"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"prodigal1" wrote in message
...
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--

The same issues apply. Typically, out here in SF, you need to replace
the rigging after 10 years one way or another. I would assume it's the
same elsewhere, although with fresh water, you might be able to go a
bit longer. I wouldn't risk it, however.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

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.

I know of a couple, and one of them belonged to me. The exact cause
was never determined but the rigging was in fact older than 10 years,
close to 20 in fact.

I would suggest inspection by a professional rigger every couple of
years. Dismastings are no fun and it will definitely take a chunk of
time out of your sailing season. Insurance companies also have a bad
habit of trying to find reasons for not covering the loss.

I'll second that... we got the money, but it was not an experience I would
like to duplicate. I can see their perspective, however. We did need to
prove it was not really a maintenance issue.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
ups.com...
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.

I know of a couple, and one of them belonged to me. The exact cause
was never determined but the rigging was in fact older than 10 years,
close to 20 in fact.

I would suggest inspection by a professional rigger every couple of
years. Dismastings are no fun and it will definitely take a chunk of
time out of your sailing season. Insurance companies also have a bad
habit of trying to find reasons for not covering the loss.

Roger Long wrote:
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.

You don't get out enough. Happens several times a year in
pretty much every major sailing area. I know of 2 on the
Chesapeake last year, for example, and that's just the ones
I heard of (happened to friend of a friend etc etc).





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


Another key to look for is uneven lay to the strands.

Most faults in standing rigging require at least a
magnifying glass to spot. I use a magnifyer plus a 18V xenon
work light.


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


Not really. The dye is just to show smaller cracks &
porosities than could be seen with just a magnifiier &
bright light.

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'm surprised some of the tangs don't have elongated
holes... bet you've replaced pins a couple of times... 33
years would make me nervous, but the expense of replacing
standing rigging would also make me hesitate.

IMHO there's no reason to replace standing rigging without
some indications from proper inspection.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006, DSK wrote:

Roger Long wrote:\

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.

You don't get out enough. Happens several times a year
in pretty much every major sailing area. I know of 2 on
the Chesapeake last year, for example, and that's just
the ones I heard of (happened to friend of a friend etc
etc).

Two boats that are kept in our marina on the L.I. Sound, in an area
where folk generally do monitor and attend to the condition of their
boats, were dismasted last summer, and we saw at least three others
(boats ranging in size from +/- 25' to +/- 42') and, on one
particularly active racing/sailing weekend, I heard of three other
dismasted boats in the area while monitor the radio (and seeing SeaTow
or BoatUS boats speeding to the distressed callers).

Happens more than that out here...

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Roger Long wrote:
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.

You don't get out enough. Happens several times a year in pretty much
every major sailing area. I know of 2 on the Chesapeake last year, for
example, and that's just the ones I heard of (happened to friend of a
friend etc etc).





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


Another key to look for is uneven lay to the strands.

Most faults in standing rigging require at least a magnifying glass to
spot. I use a magnifyer plus a 18V xenon work light.


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


Not really. The dye is just to show smaller cracks & porosities than could
be seen with just a magnifiier & bright light.

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'm surprised some of the tangs don't have elongated holes... bet you've
replaced pins a couple of times... 33 years would make me nervous, but the
expense of replacing standing rigging would also make me hesitate.

IMHO there's no reason to replace standing rigging without some
indications from proper inspection.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 19:58:48 -0500, DSK wrote:


I'm surprised some of the tangs don't have elongated
holes... bet you've replaced pins a couple of times...

Yes, I carry spares and replace many cotter pins per year and some
clevis pins as necessary. Others are in (visible) good shape. There's
nothing currently that's elongated save for a slight deformation on a
chain plate. I've replaced a couple of bolts there and I believe that
improper tightening was at least partly at fault.

33
years would make me nervous, but the expense of replacing
standing rigging would also make me hesitate.

Yeah, it's a biggie...probably between $5,000 to $8,000 Cdn.

IMHO there's no reason to replace standing rigging without
some indications from proper inspection.

Which I try to do. I also know the history of the boat, me being the
fourth owner in the same club, and knowing that it hasn't been raced
since the early '80s, just conservatively cruised on the Great Lakes.

Which is not to say there might not be a major problem I can't see. So
I've started to save for the season (in the next three or four) when I
have everything redone, the spreaders remade, the sheaves and internal
halyards replaced, and I myself will cut out and reglass the entire
forward bilge/mast step area.

The fact that I also sail conservatively and yet regularly take the
boat out in heavy air gives me some confidence, as does the generally
overbuilt qualities of an Ontario Yacht make of a C&C design from just
before epoxy got expensive. G

R.

"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