Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#12
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
Free 1960 28' Triton Pearson - Link
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 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Free NOAA ENC Charts vs. Free Maptech Charts | Cruising |