"Mic" wrote in message
...

"FREE 1960 28' Pearson Triton PROJECT
We are looking for a home for a 1960 Pearson Triton, Hull #69. I'll
be honest, this is a real project boat. It is free for who ever will
come haul it out of our back yard and we will throw in the 5
boatstands it is sitting on. This boat is a COMPLETE REBUILD, mostly
what you would be getting is a sound hull, but it's a big job to be
sure."

http://blog.oldragbaggersonline.com/

Mic'67

http://www.dasein668.com/

You might be able to look past the rotting deck, but missing the mast/boom
and a trashed engine? If it had a serviceable engine and the spar I don't
think the current owner would be giving it away.

John Cairns

Not really... if you look at the numbers, you'll find
Hunters & Catalinas in the same price bracket are more popular.


Mic wrote:
Yep.... and why are they more popular?

They're roomier & seem more comfortable for a given size &
cost, would be my guess.


... From my research most of the GRP pre 1970 are
bristols, tartans, tritons, cals for a particular reason.


Tartan started out as D&M, Cal started out as Jensen... back
at the beginning of the fiberglass boat boat boom, lots of
companies went through expansion, buy-out, re-organization,
etc etc. In a lot of cases the same boat was built in the
same plant under four or five different names.



Possibly so, but what other boat of today is comparable?

Comparable in what way?


Well overbuilt for one with little or no oil canning, full keel for
that size of boat, provisions for an OB in a well


Lots of moderns boats are built structurally superior to
1960s fiberglass, there are better engineering & materials
available. Others are of course built cheap.

It's like anything else, the more you know about it, the
easier it is to tell what's really good.

As for full keels, IMHO they are over rated. Heavy & slow
with no real advantage... If you want a protected rudder,
youo can have that without a full keel, if you want a boat
that can go aground without damage you can have that too (in
fact I'd prefer both, along with a boat that can be left
aground thru a tide without falling on it's side).

Outboard wells suck. I would not have one on a boat, it's
the worst of both worlds. But that's just from my experience
with several boats that had them. The *one* thing that is
good about outboard wells is that it preserves the classic
look of a counter stern.



Those who decide to restore a boat can be of similar value to actually
sailing it, certainly not for all. The true currency of life is time
and the value is the enjoyment of the time spent.

Agreed.

... If restoring a boat
is as you say it is why do so many do it?

Because they enjoy it for it's own sake? Because their dream
revolves not only around sailing a boat but sailing a
*certain* boat which looks a certain way and is equipped a
certain way? Why do so many people build boats from scratch?




I guess my point is that the Triton in particular is more worthy of
restoration than any other of that era in my opinion and seemingly
many others.


Like I said, it's a pretty boat. And they probably have
about the best mix of features available in that era.

FWIW my grandfather hated the early fiberglass production
boats, definitely including the Triton, and thought they
were ugly botched copies of classic designs.


It's amazing how many people sieze on the first boat that
comes along, and convince themselves that it's by far the
best alternative, and of course they have no idea what the
alternatives are or would cost so it's an easy sell.


Well yes and no for the most part many makes and brands of boats are
specific to a region or particular boat centers of about less than 12
in the US and less than about 6 in Canada. For instance for a Cal 27
to become available in this region would be rare and exceptional. The
alternative would be a C & C, Grampian, CS, S2.

True. There is a big difference in regional tastes and boats
that are considered desirable in some areas will be
considered a freak in others. This tendency seems to be
holding it's own in this mass-media era, maybe we should cheer?


..To a large degree
every boat is a compromise.

Boy is it ever!

... I think that those that buy used dont
necessary end up with the make they were looking for to begin with.
The cost of buying a boat from a different region in terms of cost, in
many instances just doesnt make sense economically.


heh heh buying a boat *never* makes sense economically!



Maybe so but the tartans, bristols, tritons and contessa's given the
maintance are time proven seaworthy.


Sorry, but that's bull****. In one way, you seem to have
gotten wrapped up in the mystique of the "seaworthingess" of
old-time heavy boats, and also to some extent with making
assumptions about brand names.

What makes a boat seaworthy is not the brand name. To some
extent, certain design characteristics make a boat more
seaworthy (such has a high LPOS) but OTOH a boat with weak
hatches, bad electrical system, rigging that is difficult to
work, rudder prone to getting jammed or broken, etc etc, is
necessarily less seaworthy than a Huntalina clorox-bottle
boat with a much lower LPOS and much less seakindly... and
the largest factor, by far, in the seaworthiness of any
boat, is the knowledge and skill of the skipper.

And this is one of my favorite points about seaworthiness...
no boat designer or builder in all history can make a boat
that is so seaworthy as to totally negate the risk in a
storm of getting konked in the head by a flying soup can.

OK getting off my soapbox now... please don't get the idea
that I'm trying to discourage you from undertaking
restoration of a Triton, but just trying to give you some
realistic ideas. And remember that every job on a boat costs
at least twice as much as you think it will, so go in with
your eyes open.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

A lot of opinion here.
One of mine is that sailboat design went to hell when the focus became "how
many people can we jam inside the boat" instead of sheer, sweep, overhangs,
and how the boat moves through, instead of bouncing around on top of, the
water.
I have a 41' boat that will sleep 7. Do I know 6 other people I like enough
to subject myself to this exercise in masochism? Not only no, but hell no.
Another of my "opinions", contrary to some other peoples "opinions", is that
coring hulls is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard of. If you haven't
run into something, you will, kinda like running aground for anyone that
sails in skinny water. Unless, of course the boat is welded to the pier
Another used to be that blisters don't sink boats. Then I saw some proud
owners of a Hunter Chenurubi sanding their hull. At one point (below the
waterline) they actually were through the glass and into the core! There's
been a lot of discussion about scrapping boats with core rot in the decks,
how about core rot in the hull? Few understand that the reason light weight
core material is used now is not because it's stronger than fiberglass or
plywood, it's because it's cheaper for the manufacturers'.
People like to point at the top end of the go fast boats and say "look how
strong", these boats are built for a race or a series of races and some
don't last that long. To me this is like new construction methods used in
houses today, I doubt many of these houses last as long as the mortgages!
In my 25 years in and on the water, I've never heard anyone say "Oh, look at
that beautiful 1999 Hunter 27!". And another, and another, and another...
We we get right down to it, some of us prefer old boats and some perfer new
boats and I'm not willing to change. I like boats that can survive a game of
"chicken"!
That's my rant.
MMC

"DSK" wrote in message
news
Not really... if you look at the numbers, you'll find
Hunters & Catalinas in the same price bracket are more popular.


Mic wrote:
Yep.... and why are they more popular?

They're roomier & seem more comfortable for a given size &
cost, would be my guess.


... From my research most of the GRP pre 1970 are
bristols, tartans, tritons, cals for a particular reason.


Tartan started out as D&M, Cal started out as Jensen... back
at the beginning of the fiberglass boat boat boom, lots of
companies went through expansion, buy-out, re-organization,
etc etc. In a lot of cases the same boat was built in the
same plant under four or five different names.



Possibly so, but what other boat of today is comparable?

Comparable in what way?


Well overbuilt for one with little or no oil canning, full keel for
that size of boat, provisions for an OB in a well


Lots of moderns boats are built structurally superior to
1960s fiberglass, there are better engineering & materials
available. Others are of course built cheap.

It's like anything else, the more you know about it, the
easier it is to tell what's really good.

As for full keels, IMHO they are over rated. Heavy & slow
with no real advantage... If you want a protected rudder,
youo can have that without a full keel, if you want a boat
that can go aground without damage you can have that too (in
fact I'd prefer both, along with a boat that can be left
aground thru a tide without falling on it's side).

Outboard wells suck. I would not have one on a boat, it's
the worst of both worlds. But that's just from my experience
with several boats that had them. The *one* thing that is
good about outboard wells is that it preserves the classic
look of a counter stern.



Those who decide to restore a boat can be of similar value to actually
sailing it, certainly not for all. The true currency of life is time
and the value is the enjoyment of the time spent.

Agreed.

... If restoring a boat
is as you say it is why do so many do it?

Because they enjoy it for it's own sake? Because their dream
revolves not only around sailing a boat but sailing a
*certain* boat which looks a certain way and is equipped a
certain way? Why do so many people build boats from scratch?




I guess my point is that the Triton in particular is more worthy of
restoration than any other of that era in my opinion and seemingly
many others.


Like I said, it's a pretty boat. And they probably have
about the best mix of features available in that era.

FWIW my grandfather hated the early fiberglass production
boats, definitely including the Triton, and thought they
were ugly botched copies of classic designs.


It's amazing how many people sieze on the first boat that
comes along, and convince themselves that it's by far the
best alternative, and of course they have no idea what the
alternatives are or would cost so it's an easy sell.


Well yes and no for the most part many makes and brands of boats are
specific to a region or particular boat centers of about less than 12
in the US and less than about 6 in Canada. For instance for a Cal 27
to become available in this region would be rare and exceptional. The
alternative would be a C & C, Grampian, CS, S2.

True. There is a big difference in regional tastes and boats
that are considered desirable in some areas will be
considered a freak in others. This tendency seems to be
holding it's own in this mass-media era, maybe we should cheer?


..To a large degree
every boat is a compromise.

Boy is it ever!

... I think that those that buy used dont
necessary end up with the make they were looking for to begin with.
The cost of buying a boat from a different region in terms of cost, in
many instances just doesnt make sense economically.


heh heh buying a boat *never* makes sense economically!



Maybe so but the tartans, bristols, tritons and contessa's given the
maintance are time proven seaworthy.


Sorry, but that's bull****. In one way, you seem to have
gotten wrapped up in the mystique of the "seaworthingess" of
old-time heavy boats, and also to some extent with making
assumptions about brand names.

What makes a boat seaworthy is not the brand name. To some
extent, certain design characteristics make a boat more
seaworthy (such has a high LPOS) but OTOH a boat with weak
hatches, bad electrical system, rigging that is difficult to
work, rudder prone to getting jammed or broken, etc etc, is
necessarily less seaworthy than a Huntalina clorox-bottle
boat with a much lower LPOS and much less seakindly... and
the largest factor, by far, in the seaworthiness of any
boat, is the knowledge and skill of the skipper.

And this is one of my favorite points about seaworthiness...
no boat designer or builder in all history can make a boat
that is so seaworthy as to totally negate the risk in a
storm of getting konked in the head by a flying soup can.

OK getting off my soapbox now... please don't get the idea
that I'm trying to discourage you from undertaking
restoration of a Triton, but just trying to give you some
realistic ideas. And remember that every job on a boat costs
at least twice as much as you think it will, so go in with
your eyes open.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

"MMC" wrote in
:

We we get right down to it, some of us prefer old boats and some
perfer new boats and I'm not willing to change. I like boats that can
survive a game of "chicken"!
That's my rant.
MMC


I took a Brunswick bowling pin that spent 20 years in a Brunswick bowling
pinsetter to a boat show. There was some bigshot Brunswick suit all
decked out, looking far out of place, on the dock. I handed him my
bowling pin and asked, "Why can't a company that can product this pin
that looks almost new after 20 years of being beaten to hell every night,
make a boat that isn't destroyed when it bumps into a dock, like an
eggshell?"

The look on his face?--------PRICELESS....(C;

Well worth the price of admission to the dog and pony show....

Don't forget....When you go to a big boatshow, always come in the clothes
you mow the lawn in. After my friend Dan sold his Hatteras 56 FBMY, he
wanted a small boat for fooling around the harbor. I told him to wear
the lawn mowing clothes. He did to humor me. We got a Grady White with
a 150 Yamaha from a nice young man who was the only boat shoe on the
floor who'd give us the time of day. It was only around $32K, nicely
decked out. "Check OK?", I asked. About that time some wheel showed up
to try to steal the commission away from him, but I informed him we'd
deal with noone but this kid...who was in, at that moment, shock. Total
sale time, nearly 2 minutes! Nice kid. I've seen him at the dealership
a few times since and he still remembers to be nice to guys in blue jeans
and an old t-shirt with dirty sneakers..(c;

In article ,
"MMC" wrote:

In my 25 years in and on the water, I've never heard anyone say "Oh, look at
that beautiful 1999 Hunter 27!".

Maybe not, but we lusted after a 34 Cherubini design -- until our
friend's needed major work after about 15 years. I won't sail the newer
Hunters even on a charter.

We we get right down to it, some of us prefer old boats and some perfer new
boats and I'm not willing to change. I like boats that can survive a game of
"chicken"!
That's my rant.

I'd prefer a newer boat that I can play "chicken" with, but there are
damned few. In the meantime, we're sticking with Xan, whose sisters have
documented astounding survivor stories.

BUT, I've been impressed by how well the Bendy-toys stand up to charter
traffic. They're not as solid as Xan, but they consistently prove
themselves to be up to extreme charter misuse while being relatively
cheap to keep.

And they're fairly fast. I don't want the stability of a full keel, and
want speed to get out of harms way.

Any boat that stands up to the bonehead tricks I've seen on charter gets
my respect.

--
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/