|
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
"Rich Hampel" wrote in message ... The Tayana and the CL-P36 have almost identical base numbers, although the TY37 is a bit faster (hull speed). (very good stuff snipped) Thanks loads! That's the sort of information it is nice to have, yet it isn't readily apparent. I'm with you on the booze weight :) Wendy |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
"JAXAshby" wrote in message ... doug, it is a Cheoy Lee. JAXAshby, what are you saying here, I don't understand. Are you saying it is a good boat because it's a Cheoy Lee?Are Doug's numbers wrong? They're what's listed in the specs for the boat in the listing. It was built in Taiwan, right? Sorry, I may be missing something obvious. -- Ken Heaton & Anne Tobin Cape Breton Island, Canada kenheaton AT ess wye dee DOT eastlink DOT ca I always like to window-shop and look over other people's shoulders. Does the cabinet around the motor come completely apart? If not, the engine access doesn't look too good to me. The genset access looks terrible. Also, you've heard the stories about teak decks, especially taiwan teak decks... "Danger Will Rogers!" One point I don't know if anybody else has mentioned- ballast/displacement ratio. If this boat's *sailing* displacement (which is a different figure from it's weight as it left the factory, a figure often quoted as 'displacement') is really 16K# then it's b/d ratio is a tad under 40%... close to the minimum for a seagoing boat IMHO. And if the displacement figure is fudged, as they often are, then it is in a grey area. Furthermore the stability will be degraded as you load stores (true of almost any boat, but much less important as the B/D ratio gets up towards 50%). Rather a nit-picky technical issue, but one that is important. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
"JAXAshby" wrote in message ... doug, it is a Cheoy Lee. JAXAshby, what are you saying here, I don't understand. Are you saying it is a good boat because it's a Cheoy Lee?Are Doug's numbers wrong? They're what's listed in the specs for the boat in the listing. It was built in Taiwan, right? Sorry, I may be missing something obvious. -- Ken Heaton & Anne Tobin Cape Breton Island, Canada kenheaton AT ess wye dee DOT eastlink DOT ca I always like to window-shop and look over other people's shoulders. Does the cabinet around the motor come completely apart? If not, the engine access doesn't look too good to me. The genset access looks terrible. Also, you've heard the stories about teak decks, especially taiwan teak decks... "Danger Will Rogers!" One point I don't know if anybody else has mentioned- ballast/displacement ratio. If this boat's *sailing* displacement (which is a different figure from it's weight as it left the factory, a figure often quoted as 'displacement') is really 16K# then it's b/d ratio is a tad under 40%... close to the minimum for a seagoing boat IMHO. And if the displacement figure is fudged, as they often are, then it is in a grey area. Furthermore the stability will be degraded as you load stores (true of almost any boat, but much less important as the B/D ratio gets up towards 50%). Rather a nit-picky technical issue, but one that is important. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
I strongly
suspect that the same principle applies to nautical design and operation. except that aero engineers are seriously trained before let loose. naval architects are, for most all states, just people who claim to be naval architects. Badly designed airplanes never get on the runway, let alone airborne. Badly designed boats that float are boats that float. I have seen people who claim to be highly qualified naval architects claim that the "slot" between an overlapping jib and the main _increases_ lift, something no aero eng on the planet would say of a biwing aircraft. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
I strongly
suspect that the same principle applies to nautical design and operation. except that aero engineers are seriously trained before let loose. naval architects are, for most all states, just people who claim to be naval architects. Badly designed airplanes never get on the runway, let alone airborne. Badly designed boats that float are boats that float. I have seen people who claim to be highly qualified naval architects claim that the "slot" between an overlapping jib and the main _increases_ lift, something no aero eng on the planet would say of a biwing aircraft. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Rich, a Tayana 37 is a nice boat. I would love to have one myself. Yet, if I
were going to deliberately go out "in harm's way" (rather than being ordinarily prudent) I might be inclined to look at a Van de Stadt 36 or a Dix 36 (in plywood, because that is both stroner and lighter). Again, a Tayana 37 is a niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice boat. Know anyone with a T-37 that needs about 400 hours of TLC cleanup and who is in deep financial trouble, a wife/mistress/mortgage all a month overdue? Let me know. [grin] I suspect Wendy is now aiming a tad more towards a nice cruising boat than a serious, knock-em-on-your-ass roughwater voyager which seemed to be the aim earlier in this thread. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Rich, a Tayana 37 is a nice boat. I would love to have one myself. Yet, if I
were going to deliberately go out "in harm's way" (rather than being ordinarily prudent) I might be inclined to look at a Van de Stadt 36 or a Dix 36 (in plywood, because that is both stroner and lighter). Again, a Tayana 37 is a niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice boat. Know anyone with a T-37 that needs about 400 hours of TLC cleanup and who is in deep financial trouble, a wife/mistress/mortgage all a month overdue? Let me know. [grin] I suspect Wendy is now aiming a tad more towards a nice cruising boat than a serious, knock-em-on-your-ass roughwater voyager which seemed to be the aim earlier in this thread. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Cheoy Lee's are good boats, and do not fit in the catagory reserved for
"Taiwanese" boats. doug, it is a Cheoy Lee. JAXAshby, what are you saying here, I don't understand. Are you saying it is a good boat because it's a Cheoy Lee?Are Doug's numbers wrong? They're what's listed in the specs for the boat in the listing. It was built in Taiwan, right? Sorry, I may be missing something obvious. -- Ken Heaton & Anne Tobin Cape Breton Island, Canada kenheaton AT ess wye dee DOT eastlink DOT ca I always like to window-shop and look over other people's shoulders. Does the cabinet around the motor come completely apart? If not, the engine access doesn't look too good to me. The genset access looks terrible. Also, you've heard the stories about teak decks, especially taiwan teak decks... "Danger Will Rogers!" One point I don't know if anybody else has mentioned- ballast/displacement ratio. If this boat's *sailing* displacement (which is a different figure from it's weight as it left the factory, a figure often quoted as 'displacement') is really 16K# then it's b/d ratio is a tad under 40%... close to the minimum for a seagoing boat IMHO. And if the displacement figure is fudged, as they often are, then it is in a grey area. Furthermore the stability will be degraded as you load stores (true of almost any boat, but much less important as the B/D ratio gets up towards 50%). Rather a nit-picky technical issue, but one that is important. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Cheoy Lee's are good boats, and do not fit in the catagory reserved for
"Taiwanese" boats. doug, it is a Cheoy Lee. JAXAshby, what are you saying here, I don't understand. Are you saying it is a good boat because it's a Cheoy Lee?Are Doug's numbers wrong? They're what's listed in the specs for the boat in the listing. It was built in Taiwan, right? Sorry, I may be missing something obvious. -- Ken Heaton & Anne Tobin Cape Breton Island, Canada kenheaton AT ess wye dee DOT eastlink DOT ca I always like to window-shop and look over other people's shoulders. Does the cabinet around the motor come completely apart? If not, the engine access doesn't look too good to me. The genset access looks terrible. Also, you've heard the stories about teak decks, especially taiwan teak decks... "Danger Will Rogers!" One point I don't know if anybody else has mentioned- ballast/displacement ratio. If this boat's *sailing* displacement (which is a different figure from it's weight as it left the factory, a figure often quoted as 'displacement') is really 16K# then it's b/d ratio is a tad under 40%... close to the minimum for a seagoing boat IMHO. And if the displacement figure is fudged, as they often are, then it is in a grey area. Furthermore the stability will be degraded as you load stores (true of almost any boat, but much less important as the B/D ratio gets up towards 50%). Rather a nit-picky technical issue, but one that is important. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
In article ,
(JAXAshby) wrote: Badly designed airplanes never get on the runway, let alone airborne. You haven't seen some of the "planes" of the EAA ;-) I saw one lifting body shaped like a flying saucer that even actually flew once, but no sane pilot would take it up for a second flight. Truth be told, the Quickie has some bad design flaws, but it sure proved the power of canards. (12 hp, 100 mph and 60+ mpg, but I believe every one of them was ground looped at least once.) I have seen people who claim to be highly qualified naval architects claim that the "slot" between an overlapping jib and the main _increases_ lift, something no aero eng on the planet would say of a biwing aircraft. You don't win many races in multi-sail boats, do you? -- 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/ |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:41:02 -0600, "Wendy"
wrote: The engine access is good- the cabinetwork does come apart. The genset would be an upside-down thing, now that you mention it... I'll look into that more this Saturday. Now, what's this I hear about taking up the teak and epoxying down again, sans screws? Anyone know anything about that? That is frequently the case with teak screwed into fiberglass: accidents waiting to happen. Teak is very nice to walk on...on other people's boats G. Me, I get the same effect from a reasonable substrate and a handful of sand. The fewer holes through or into most decks, the better, I think, and teak does add weight where you don't want it. Even in the Great Lakes, where wear and tear on surfaces is arguably less (excepting the freeze-thaw expansion problems on exposed decks in winter), I see the evidence of former teak decking frequently. Expensive to tear out and refinish, but not as expensive as keeping it in, at least for some. Your mileage, etc... Looks nice, but I don't have the crew of "Master and Commander" to keep it dry and clean. R. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:41:02 -0600, "Wendy"
wrote: The engine access is good- the cabinetwork does come apart. The genset would be an upside-down thing, now that you mention it... I'll look into that more this Saturday. Now, what's this I hear about taking up the teak and epoxying down again, sans screws? Anyone know anything about that? That is frequently the case with teak screwed into fiberglass: accidents waiting to happen. Teak is very nice to walk on...on other people's boats G. Me, I get the same effect from a reasonable substrate and a handful of sand. The fewer holes through or into most decks, the better, I think, and teak does add weight where you don't want it. Even in the Great Lakes, where wear and tear on surfaces is arguably less (excepting the freeze-thaw expansion problems on exposed decks in winter), I see the evidence of former teak decking frequently. Expensive to tear out and refinish, but not as expensive as keeping it in, at least for some. Your mileage, etc... Looks nice, but I don't have the crew of "Master and Commander" to keep it dry and clean. R. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 21:35:11 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote: The underlayment of teak decks on Tayanas is built up of softwood squares individually isolated by dams of polyester. If such underlayment does get wet it usually doesnt not spread accross the whole deck as would be the case with ''sheets' of core filler. Not that you cant get a soggy deck on a Tayana; but, if you do the damage wont be as catastrophic as would a deck with continuous underlayment filler. Teak deck maintenance isnt all that bad if you kkep up a gentle and consistent regime of maintenance. Hell, I bet you expend more time scrubbing a glass deck than a teak deck owner does in periodically looking for loose bungs. Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. The opposing view, and no doubt a boat I would love to visit because it looks so nice. This gentleman knows the problems with teak, knows how to deal with them, knows the best case scenario, and considers the net benefit worth it. I do not, although I've seen nice teak over metal decks that would put me off less than teak over cored decks. To each sailor his or her own. The less wood on the outside, the happier I am, but that's me and is totally from the upkeep point of view. R. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 21:35:11 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote: The underlayment of teak decks on Tayanas is built up of softwood squares individually isolated by dams of polyester. If such underlayment does get wet it usually doesnt not spread accross the whole deck as would be the case with ''sheets' of core filler. Not that you cant get a soggy deck on a Tayana; but, if you do the damage wont be as catastrophic as would a deck with continuous underlayment filler. Teak deck maintenance isnt all that bad if you kkep up a gentle and consistent regime of maintenance. Hell, I bet you expend more time scrubbing a glass deck than a teak deck owner does in periodically looking for loose bungs. Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. The opposing view, and no doubt a boat I would love to visit because it looks so nice. This gentleman knows the problems with teak, knows how to deal with them, knows the best case scenario, and considers the net benefit worth it. I do not, although I've seen nice teak over metal decks that would put me off less than teak over cored decks. To each sailor his or her own. The less wood on the outside, the happier I am, but that's me and is totally from the upkeep point of view. R. |
Boat Choices... teak decks
Rich Hampel wrote:
Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. I've heard a lot of people say this, but it's not true in my observations. This is probably heresy, but to me it has always seemed like a teak deck is among the worst surfaces. I don't expect anybody else to agree, but I am telling only what I have seen to be true. I've heard "A teak deck is best when barefoot" when it has been proven to me by painful experience that a teak deck will get blistering hot in the southern sun. I've heard "A teak deck is incredible non-skid" said by a crew who had just returned from the foredeck on their hands & knees. In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. wrote: The opposing view, and no doubt a boat I would love to visit because it looks so nice. This gentleman knows the problems with teak, knows how to deal with them, knows the best case scenario, and considers the net benefit worth it. I do not, although I've seen nice teak over metal decks that would put me off less than teak over cored decks. To each sailor his or her own. The less wood on the outside, the happier I am, but that's me and is totally from the upkeep point of view. A little wood here & there is nice, but whole layer of it over the deck is a bit much. Might as well build the whole boat out of the stuff ;) Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Boat Choices... teak decks
Rich Hampel wrote:
Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. I've heard a lot of people say this, but it's not true in my observations. This is probably heresy, but to me it has always seemed like a teak deck is among the worst surfaces. I don't expect anybody else to agree, but I am telling only what I have seen to be true. I've heard "A teak deck is best when barefoot" when it has been proven to me by painful experience that a teak deck will get blistering hot in the southern sun. I've heard "A teak deck is incredible non-skid" said by a crew who had just returned from the foredeck on their hands & knees. In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. wrote: The opposing view, and no doubt a boat I would love to visit because it looks so nice. This gentleman knows the problems with teak, knows how to deal with them, knows the best case scenario, and considers the net benefit worth it. I do not, although I've seen nice teak over metal decks that would put me off less than teak over cored decks. To each sailor his or her own. The less wood on the outside, the happier I am, but that's me and is totally from the upkeep point of view. A little wood here & there is nice, but whole layer of it over the deck is a bit much. Might as well build the whole boat out of the stuff ;) Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Wendy wrote:
Ok, I got intrigued and ran some numbers applying your above methodology to three other boats (I'm in accounting, numbers interest me): Pacific Seacraft 37 .38 Tayana 37 .30 (!!) Cabo Rico 37 .37 Now, I am not a naval architect, but the people who designed the above (well-respected) sea-going yachts are, and their numbers prompt me to ask what you base your 40% number on. I'm not calling your assertion questionable, I just want to know what I am missing here- help me out. OK, looks like I spoke in haste, at least a little bit. Looking over the boat data base and running some numbers, I see a lot of well respected cruising boats in the -below 40- category. I wonder if that is due to one or more of the following Any given boat can only carry X amount of weight... more ballast = less stores All else being equal, it's more expensive to build a boat with a higher B/D ratio A slightly lower B/D ratio will not make as big a difference in stability in the common ranges of heel while sailing, but will make a noticable difference in easy motion in a seaway. "Seakindliness" is a term that may be applicable. It's just a matter of differing priorities... and shucks, if you've got the skill, you can circumnavigate in a canoe! However, having sailed a wide range of boat types, my own taste leans strongly towards the highest B/D ratio practical. Not to say you should get a racing type boat with B/D around 60%, but there are plenty of boats over 40% or even 45% that would get a nod from serious passagemaker types. The following is not a complete list at all, just boats that caught my eye running through the data base- Over 50%: Ericson 39, Abbott 33, Tartan 41, Avance 36, Kalik 40, Serendipity 43, Morgan 41 (the old model) Between 50% ~ 45%: Hylas 44, Cal 39-3, Tartan 37, C&C 40, Bristol 38.8, Island Packet 350 & 37, Catalina 38, Hughes 38, some Ericsons, Westerlys, Amels, Cape Dories Between 45% ~ 40%: Calibers, Gozzards, Aldens, Contests, Sabres, Bristols, Morris (mostly Chuck Paine designs AFAIK),Oysters, Albergs, Bowmans, Hallberg-Rassy, Tayana 42 & 47 This is ignoring some of the boats that could make great cruisers but probably would not be on your personal list, like Swans, the Corel 45, NY-40, J-125, or the Herreshoff S-boat ;) but am just showing that it's not totally crazy to put priority there. Fresh Breezes- Doug King I don't understand why the bigger Tayanas have a higher B/D ratio, it seems to me that a smaller boat would need more reserve stability, not less. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Wendy wrote:
Ok, I got intrigued and ran some numbers applying your above methodology to three other boats (I'm in accounting, numbers interest me): Pacific Seacraft 37 .38 Tayana 37 .30 (!!) Cabo Rico 37 .37 Now, I am not a naval architect, but the people who designed the above (well-respected) sea-going yachts are, and their numbers prompt me to ask what you base your 40% number on. I'm not calling your assertion questionable, I just want to know what I am missing here- help me out. OK, looks like I spoke in haste, at least a little bit. Looking over the boat data base and running some numbers, I see a lot of well respected cruising boats in the -below 40- category. I wonder if that is due to one or more of the following Any given boat can only carry X amount of weight... more ballast = less stores All else being equal, it's more expensive to build a boat with a higher B/D ratio A slightly lower B/D ratio will not make as big a difference in stability in the common ranges of heel while sailing, but will make a noticable difference in easy motion in a seaway. "Seakindliness" is a term that may be applicable. It's just a matter of differing priorities... and shucks, if you've got the skill, you can circumnavigate in a canoe! However, having sailed a wide range of boat types, my own taste leans strongly towards the highest B/D ratio practical. Not to say you should get a racing type boat with B/D around 60%, but there are plenty of boats over 40% or even 45% that would get a nod from serious passagemaker types. The following is not a complete list at all, just boats that caught my eye running through the data base- Over 50%: Ericson 39, Abbott 33, Tartan 41, Avance 36, Kalik 40, Serendipity 43, Morgan 41 (the old model) Between 50% ~ 45%: Hylas 44, Cal 39-3, Tartan 37, C&C 40, Bristol 38.8, Island Packet 350 & 37, Catalina 38, Hughes 38, some Ericsons, Westerlys, Amels, Cape Dories Between 45% ~ 40%: Calibers, Gozzards, Aldens, Contests, Sabres, Bristols, Morris (mostly Chuck Paine designs AFAIK),Oysters, Albergs, Bowmans, Hallberg-Rassy, Tayana 42 & 47 This is ignoring some of the boats that could make great cruisers but probably would not be on your personal list, like Swans, the Corel 45, NY-40, J-125, or the Herreshoff S-boat ;) but am just showing that it's not totally crazy to put priority there. Fresh Breezes- Doug King I don't understand why the bigger Tayanas have a higher B/D ratio, it seems to me that a smaller boat would need more reserve stability, not less. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
I was part of the EAA for years, and my baby brother used to write technical
articles for them. To get an amateur built aircraft into the air requires a serious inspection by the FAA and flight testing in an out of the way area. To get an aircraft design "type certified" is a much long and expensive process, and must be completed before an aircraft can be manufactured for sale. No such thing is needed to produce a boat for sale. Anyone -- in most states -- can call themselves a naval architect. Even an 8 year old girl in pigtails. (JAXAshby) wrote: Badly designed airplanes never get on the runway, let alone airborne. You haven't seen some of the "planes" of the EAA ;-) I saw one lifting body shaped like a flying saucer that even actually flew once, but no sane pilot would take it up for a second flight. Truth be told, the Quickie has some bad design flaws, but it sure proved the power of canards. (12 hp, 100 mph and 60+ mpg, but I believe every one of them was ground looped at least once.) I have seen people who claim to be highly qualified naval architects claim that the "slot" between an overlapping jib and the main _increases_ lift, something no aero eng on the planet would say of a biwing aircraft. You don't win many races in multi-sail boats, do you? -- 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/ |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
I was part of the EAA for years, and my baby brother used to write technical
articles for them. To get an amateur built aircraft into the air requires a serious inspection by the FAA and flight testing in an out of the way area. To get an aircraft design "type certified" is a much long and expensive process, and must be completed before an aircraft can be manufactured for sale. No such thing is needed to produce a boat for sale. Anyone -- in most states -- can call themselves a naval architect. Even an 8 year old girl in pigtails. (JAXAshby) wrote: Badly designed airplanes never get on the runway, let alone airborne. You haven't seen some of the "planes" of the EAA ;-) I saw one lifting body shaped like a flying saucer that even actually flew once, but no sane pilot would take it up for a second flight. Truth be told, the Quickie has some bad design flaws, but it sure proved the power of canards. (12 hp, 100 mph and 60+ mpg, but I believe every one of them was ground looped at least once.) I have seen people who claim to be highly qualified naval architects claim that the "slot" between an overlapping jib and the main _increases_ lift, something no aero eng on the planet would say of a biwing aircraft. You don't win many races in multi-sail boats, do you? -- 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/ |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
I get the same effect from a reasonable
substrate and a handful of sand. sand makes for one *mighty* RUFF non-skid (think 3M 50 grit sandpaper). Tends to be tough on knees, ankles, elbows, hands, seats of the pants, swimsuits, etc. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
I get the same effect from a reasonable
substrate and a handful of sand. sand makes for one *mighty* RUFF non-skid (think 3M 50 grit sandpaper). Tends to be tough on knees, ankles, elbows, hands, seats of the pants, swimsuits, etc. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
A good suggestion - Sailnet hosts quite a few owners forums and they
are a good place to get inside information. Eric Rich Hampel wrote in message ... I state again, when you get serious about the purchase of a particular design .... go to the owners groups located on the web, etc. Most of these owners groups have periodic rendezvous, etc. Thse owners groups are usually open to 'prospective' owners and may invite you to a rendevous or two. That way you will be able to really 'kick some tires' and maybe get a sail or two in (the usual entry fee is a covered dish). Also most 'good' boats are sold (quickly) though such owners groups. Its the boats that dont move quick that get shunted off to 'brokers' .... with added commission fees, etc. In article , Eric wrote: I would recommend you stay away from the teak deck in a boat almost 20 years old. Teak decks, because of the screw holes (used to hold the teak down), are prone to causing saturation and/or delamination of the underlying deck core material unless the boat has been well maintained for the entire 20 years. Just because it looks good doesn't mean that the underlying deck and core are in good condition. Repairing a saturated core is a major (read: expensive) job. The PS Crealock is probably the best quality but, as you are seeing, that comes at a high price. It's also pretty small inside (IMO). Don't compromise on the boat. You can always stretch out the purchase of the extras. Eric "Wendy" wrote in message ... I had a close look at four boats today, all offered through brokers. The experience was a pleasurable one; the brokers were pleasant enough and quite helpful. The weather was a bit cool for my taste, though. Anyway, here's what I looked over in the order in which I saw them, along with my thoughts: Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging. Belowdecks, the engine is easily accessible, the cabin layout is sensible and not ostentatiously ornate. She has a genset, which is a plus, but no stove- a definite minus (one could easily be added, however). She's radar-equipped, no SSB or GPS. She would be a fine live-aboard and coastal cruiser, and should handle longer range cruising as the tankage is more than adequate. I'd like to research Cheoy Lee's more; I liked this boat. At an asking price of less than $60,000 she is well within my budget. Pacific Seacraft Crealock 34, 1990 Model: Nice boat; she has a spartan interior and a non-nonsense air about her. This boat is clearly designed for ocean passages. Living aboard would not be difficult, but again the boat is designed to go anywhere, not sit on a dock. At just under $100,000 she is out of my price range, so I didn't really seriously evaluate all her features. Cabo Rico 38, 1981 Model: She was once a nice boat, but neglect has sadly hurt her. The below $80,000 price reflects the condition she's in; it would take a lot of work to bring this boat up to snuff. The teak deck is shot. I would take a pass on this boat; I don't want a project. Tayana 37, 1982 Model: Wonderful boat, she has lots of room and is built like a tank. She has a Perkins, which I like as I have lots of experience with them. She's air-conditioned as well, a must in Texas. Very beamy and not at all claustrophobic, the boat is clearly designed for comfort and safety. She is equipped with a wind generator as well as a wind vane steering system. She has no navigation station; the large quarterberth is designed as an aft stateroom. I would prefer a nav station, but a fold down table sort of thing could be easily added by a carpenter. Electronics consists of an SSB; a radar and GPS system would have to be added (I am a Garmin GPS junkie, I'll freely admit that :) Her asking price of $85,000 is within my budget, though I would have to scrape for any planned add-ons. It should be apparent that the first and last boats I looked at were the two which appealed most to me. I have distinct reservations about a teak deck, and while the Cheoy Lee is not the dedicated ocean passage boat that the Tayana is, she would no doubt provide years of performance and satisfaction. The Tayana represents security, comfort, and hominess. She has many of the features I would like in a boat, and probably represents the better investment of the two. It's quite clear to me that I am not exactly sure what I want at this point in time, although I am sure that as I continue to research and actively start sailing that this will become self-evident before I buy. I understand now why searching for a boat can take quite some time. Wendy |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
A good suggestion - Sailnet hosts quite a few owners forums and they
are a good place to get inside information. Eric Rich Hampel wrote in message ... I state again, when you get serious about the purchase of a particular design .... go to the owners groups located on the web, etc. Most of these owners groups have periodic rendezvous, etc. Thse owners groups are usually open to 'prospective' owners and may invite you to a rendevous or two. That way you will be able to really 'kick some tires' and maybe get a sail or two in (the usual entry fee is a covered dish). Also most 'good' boats are sold (quickly) though such owners groups. Its the boats that dont move quick that get shunted off to 'brokers' .... with added commission fees, etc. In article , Eric wrote: I would recommend you stay away from the teak deck in a boat almost 20 years old. Teak decks, because of the screw holes (used to hold the teak down), are prone to causing saturation and/or delamination of the underlying deck core material unless the boat has been well maintained for the entire 20 years. Just because it looks good doesn't mean that the underlying deck and core are in good condition. Repairing a saturated core is a major (read: expensive) job. The PS Crealock is probably the best quality but, as you are seeing, that comes at a high price. It's also pretty small inside (IMO). Don't compromise on the boat. You can always stretch out the purchase of the extras. Eric "Wendy" wrote in message ... I had a close look at four boats today, all offered through brokers. The experience was a pleasurable one; the brokers were pleasant enough and quite helpful. The weather was a bit cool for my taste, though. Anyway, here's what I looked over in the order in which I saw them, along with my thoughts: Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging. Belowdecks, the engine is easily accessible, the cabin layout is sensible and not ostentatiously ornate. She has a genset, which is a plus, but no stove- a definite minus (one could easily be added, however). She's radar-equipped, no SSB or GPS. She would be a fine live-aboard and coastal cruiser, and should handle longer range cruising as the tankage is more than adequate. I'd like to research Cheoy Lee's more; I liked this boat. At an asking price of less than $60,000 she is well within my budget. Pacific Seacraft Crealock 34, 1990 Model: Nice boat; she has a spartan interior and a non-nonsense air about her. This boat is clearly designed for ocean passages. Living aboard would not be difficult, but again the boat is designed to go anywhere, not sit on a dock. At just under $100,000 she is out of my price range, so I didn't really seriously evaluate all her features. Cabo Rico 38, 1981 Model: She was once a nice boat, but neglect has sadly hurt her. The below $80,000 price reflects the condition she's in; it would take a lot of work to bring this boat up to snuff. The teak deck is shot. I would take a pass on this boat; I don't want a project. Tayana 37, 1982 Model: Wonderful boat, she has lots of room and is built like a tank. She has a Perkins, which I like as I have lots of experience with them. She's air-conditioned as well, a must in Texas. Very beamy and not at all claustrophobic, the boat is clearly designed for comfort and safety. She is equipped with a wind generator as well as a wind vane steering system. She has no navigation station; the large quarterberth is designed as an aft stateroom. I would prefer a nav station, but a fold down table sort of thing could be easily added by a carpenter. Electronics consists of an SSB; a radar and GPS system would have to be added (I am a Garmin GPS junkie, I'll freely admit that :) Her asking price of $85,000 is within my budget, though I would have to scrape for any planned add-ons. It should be apparent that the first and last boats I looked at were the two which appealed most to me. I have distinct reservations about a teak deck, and while the Cheoy Lee is not the dedicated ocean passage boat that the Tayana is, she would no doubt provide years of performance and satisfaction. The Tayana represents security, comfort, and hominess. She has many of the features I would like in a boat, and probably represents the better investment of the two. It's quite clear to me that I am not exactly sure what I want at this point in time, although I am sure that as I continue to research and actively start sailing that this will become self-evident before I buy. I understand now why searching for a boat can take quite some time. Wendy |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
|
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
|
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:23:22 GMT, Cindy Ballreich
Once you've weighed the cost, it comes down to what you prefer. If you like the look and feel of teak decks, and you don't mind a little additional work, go for it! If you don't like that sort of thing, there's a world of fiberglass decks just waiting for you. Cindy Very true, and I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. I think if you luck out or have the knowledge to preserve/repair/maintain a teak deck, it's a Good Thing. But most don't, and don't have the time to add to the already long list of Boat Stuff We Must Get To Before Actually Sailing.... Maybe the solution is to learn how to INSTALL a teck deck, and then do it yourself. At least then the blame and the credit fall where they should G R. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:23:22 GMT, Cindy Ballreich
Once you've weighed the cost, it comes down to what you prefer. If you like the look and feel of teak decks, and you don't mind a little additional work, go for it! If you don't like that sort of thing, there's a world of fiberglass decks just waiting for you. Cindy Very true, and I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. I think if you luck out or have the knowledge to preserve/repair/maintain a teak deck, it's a Good Thing. But most don't, and don't have the time to add to the already long list of Boat Stuff We Must Get To Before Actually Sailing.... Maybe the solution is to learn how to INSTALL a teck deck, and then do it yourself. At least then the blame and the credit fall where they should G R. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
In her original post she said it was the Cheoy Lee that had the teak
decks, not the Tayana. "Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging." Did they build them the same way? I don't know. Eric Rich Hampel wrote in message ... The underlayment of teak decks on Tayanas is built up of softwood squares individually isolated by dams of polyester. If such underlayment does get wet it usually doesnt not spread accross the whole deck as would be the case with ''sheets' of core filler. Not that you cant get a soggy deck on a Tayana; but, if you do the damage wont be as catastrophic as would a deck with continuous underlayment filler. Teak deck maintenance isnt all that bad if you kkep up a gentle and consistent regime of maintenance. Hell, I bet you expend more time scrubbing a glass deck than a teak deck owner does in periodically looking for loose bungs. Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
In her original post she said it was the Cheoy Lee that had the teak
decks, not the Tayana. "Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging." Did they build them the same way? I don't know. Eric Rich Hampel wrote in message ... The underlayment of teak decks on Tayanas is built up of softwood squares individually isolated by dams of polyester. If such underlayment does get wet it usually doesnt not spread accross the whole deck as would be the case with ''sheets' of core filler. Not that you cant get a soggy deck on a Tayana; but, if you do the damage wont be as catastrophic as would a deck with continuous underlayment filler. Teak deck maintenance isnt all that bad if you kkep up a gentle and consistent regime of maintenance. Hell, I bet you expend more time scrubbing a glass deck than a teak deck owner does in periodically looking for loose bungs. Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. |
Boat Choices... teak decks
"DSK" wrote in message .. . In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. A friend of mine has a Choy Lee that had the deck problem and he removed the teak and replaced it with Treadmaster. I have it on my boat, which I love, but it is awful on bare feet. Leanne s/v Fundy |
Boat Choices... teak decks
"DSK" wrote in message .. . In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. A friend of mine has a Choy Lee that had the deck problem and he removed the teak and replaced it with Treadmaster. I have it on my boat, which I love, but it is awful on bare feet. Leanne s/v Fundy |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
eric, if you don't know what a Tayana 37 is, don't comment. contribute or
lurk. your only other choice is to open your mouth and be flamed. now, eric, go try to find out what a Tayana 37 is. In her original post she said it was the Cheoy Lee that had the teak decks, not the Tayana. "Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging." Did they build them the same way? I don't know. Eric Rich Hampel wrote in message ... The underlayment of teak decks on Tayanas is built up of softwood squares individually isolated by dams of polyester. If such underlayment does get wet it usually doesnt not spread accross the whole deck as would be the case with ''sheets' of core filler. Not that you cant get a soggy deck on a Tayana; but, if you do the damage wont be as catastrophic as would a deck with continuous underlayment filler. Teak deck maintenance isnt all that bad if you kkep up a gentle and consistent regime of maintenance. Hell, I bet you expend more time scrubbing a glass deck than a teak deck owner does in periodically looking for loose bungs. Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
eric, if you don't know what a Tayana 37 is, don't comment. contribute or
lurk. your only other choice is to open your mouth and be flamed. now, eric, go try to find out what a Tayana 37 is. In her original post she said it was the Cheoy Lee that had the teak decks, not the Tayana. "Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging." Did they build them the same way? I don't know. Eric Rich Hampel wrote in message ... The underlayment of teak decks on Tayanas is built up of softwood squares individually isolated by dams of polyester. If such underlayment does get wet it usually doesnt not spread accross the whole deck as would be the case with ''sheets' of core filler. Not that you cant get a soggy deck on a Tayana; but, if you do the damage wont be as catastrophic as would a deck with continuous underlayment filler. Teak deck maintenance isnt all that bad if you kkep up a gentle and consistent regime of maintenance. Hell, I bet you expend more time scrubbing a glass deck than a teak deck owner does in periodically looking for loose bungs. Give me a teak deck anytime. So what if it makes the boat a bit more top heavy, **nothing** is this world has the non-dkid ability of bare teak. |
Boat Choices... teak decks
x-no-archive:yes
"Leanne" wrote: "DSK" wrote in message . .. In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. A friend of mine has a Choy Lee that had the deck problem and he removed the teak and replaced it with Treadmaster. I have it on my boat, which I love, but it is awful on bare feet. I love to go barefoot, and I do not find that Treadmaster is terrible on bare feet. Just very non-slippery. But of course I can walk on gravel barefoot (although I have to be cautious), and I've learned how to walk across a parking lot on a hot day by staying on the white paint lines that mark out the parking spaces. I do draw the line at things like glass, rose bush cuttings and American Chestnut hulls (which have tiny spines) OTOH, my husband doesn't go barefoot at all and has very tender feet. He's pretty AR about not letting anyone on deck with bare feet when underway. And I have proved to myself that the non-Treadmaster parts of the deck are slipperier with bare feet than with shoes. grandma Rosalie |
Boat Choices... teak decks
x-no-archive:yes
"Leanne" wrote: "DSK" wrote in message . .. In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. A friend of mine has a Choy Lee that had the deck problem and he removed the teak and replaced it with Treadmaster. I have it on my boat, which I love, but it is awful on bare feet. I love to go barefoot, and I do not find that Treadmaster is terrible on bare feet. Just very non-slippery. But of course I can walk on gravel barefoot (although I have to be cautious), and I've learned how to walk across a parking lot on a hot day by staying on the white paint lines that mark out the parking spaces. I do draw the line at things like glass, rose bush cuttings and American Chestnut hulls (which have tiny spines) OTOH, my husband doesn't go barefoot at all and has very tender feet. He's pretty AR about not letting anyone on deck with bare feet when underway. And I have proved to myself that the non-Treadmaster parts of the deck are slipperier with bare feet than with shoes. grandma Rosalie |
Boat Choices... teak decks
"Leanne" wrote in message ...
"DSK" wrote in message .. . In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. A friend of mine has a Choy Lee that had the deck problem and he removed the teak and replaced it with Treadmaster. I have it on my boat, which I love, but it is awful on bare feet. Leanne s/v Fundy I happen to think their is nothing better than a teak deck. You get better traction and their easier on your feet because they have more "give" than a fiberglass deck (we're talking about a "proper" installation here, no fiberglass deck underneath). But the best part about them is the cockpit is much cooler than fiberglass, which is very reflective. Just wet the teak down and it doesn't reflect the sunlight like fiberglass, and the water evaporating from the teak helps keep it cool as well. Also, they don't damage like a fiberglass deck when you drop something heavy on it (put a wet rag over the dented teak and a hot clothes iron on top of the rag, keep wetting the rag, you will be surprised how many dents you can get to come out like this). I admitt it takes a lot of work to keep it looking good, but do a side by side comparison, the teak just looks so much better. As far as having a teak deck over a cored deck, who ever did the job should be hung by his thumbs. That's just a serious problem waiting to happen. |
Boat Choices... teak decks
"Leanne" wrote in message ...
"DSK" wrote in message .. . In short, I own a boat with a teak deck... they're beautiful but they are not practical in any way... the maintenance is awful, the surface is unreliable, and if it's screwed down over cored fiberglass it's a lurking rot instigator. Our teak deck is coming off in the near future, to be replaced by either plain fiberglass with painted non-skid, or perhaps those industrial textured non-skid materials. A friend of mine has a Choy Lee that had the deck problem and he removed the teak and replaced it with Treadmaster. I have it on my boat, which I love, but it is awful on bare feet. Leanne s/v Fundy I happen to think their is nothing better than a teak deck. You get better traction and their easier on your feet because they have more "give" than a fiberglass deck (we're talking about a "proper" installation here, no fiberglass deck underneath). But the best part about them is the cockpit is much cooler than fiberglass, which is very reflective. Just wet the teak down and it doesn't reflect the sunlight like fiberglass, and the water evaporating from the teak helps keep it cool as well. Also, they don't damage like a fiberglass deck when you drop something heavy on it (put a wet rag over the dented teak and a hot clothes iron on top of the rag, keep wetting the rag, you will be surprised how many dents you can get to come out like this). I admitt it takes a lot of work to keep it looking good, but do a side by side comparison, the teak just looks so much better. As far as having a teak deck over a cored deck, who ever did the job should be hung by his thumbs. That's just a serious problem waiting to happen. |
Looked today ( Boat Choices)
Hi Wendy,
I looked around in the Kemah area a couple of weeks ago. I think I looked at a couple of the same boats you did. That PSC 34 didn't appear to have been very well taken care of. May be okay, but I steered clear of it. Glad to see you did too. I am not at all impressed with PSC anyway. Can't for the life of me figure out what everybody sees in them and why everybody is so willing to pay 50% more than a comparable boat. I wonder if you happened to take a close look at the joinery work in that boat? The 34 also seemed like a very small boat to me. I did not look at the Pedrick because everything I looked at said he designed the boat as a cruiser/racer, not for offshore work, contrary to the standard Cheoy Lee. Offshore is what *I* plan to do with a boat, which brings me to my main point, buying a boat that matches the intended use. I apologize if the point has already been made. I did a lot of serious thinking about where I wanted to go. How many people would be going, what size sails I wanted to handle, how fast I wanted to get there, etc. I also gave a lot of thought to how much time I expected to spend at sea versus at the dock or at anchor, and what compromises I wanted to make in those areas. I will suggest a couple of boats that might interest you, that are in the Kemah area. First, since you like the Tayana (I did too) you might like the Tayana 42. Also known as the Vancouver 42. The Center Cockpit model has a long fin keel instead of the full length one. The interior is massive. Lots of storage, big cabins, the saloon is more like a living room. There was one down that way for a pretty reasonable price. There is a Mao Ta 36 which is another Taiwan built boat that I don't know a lot about. I have not looked at it yet. The pictures of it are beautiful. I think they are asking $85K. http://www.yachtworld.com Also, a bit more expensive, is the Slocum 36 at the Higgins Smythe docks. Very stout heavy boat with a really neat interior. A/C, Heat, etc. Very pretty boat. Money wise, yes, teak decks are expensive to replace, but it can also cost just as much to replace a rotten or leaking cast iron water or fuel tank if you have to tear out the entire galley to get it out and back in. Many 15-20 year old cruisers have those tanks. Diesels are also thousands to replace. Keel bolts, etc The boat yards I have inquired at tell me that the vast majority of teak deck replacements do not require major work to deck itself. So far I am not so fearful of teak decks. They look great and offer the best non-skid around, even when wet, which is what I want alone in the middle of the ocean. A survey I read a bit ago said that most owners spend 25% of the sales price getting the boat back to the condition they want it in. Don't take that wrong, I am not trying to rain on your parade. I am in the same parade. It just made me rethink about financing, down payments, etc. not to mention the cost of the boat. Do I spend more to get a better boat, or buy less boat to have more left over.........????? Boats!!!! Complicated Business. "Wendy" wrote in message ... I had a close look at four boats today, all offered through brokers. The experience was a pleasurable one; the brokers were pleasant enough and quite helpful. The weather was a bit cool for my taste, though. Anyway, here's what I looked over in the order in which I saw them, along with my thoughts: Cheoy Lee Pedrick 36, 1985 Model: This boat is simply a very good looking boat; it has loads of visual appeal and has been well-kept. The teak deck is in quite good condition, as are the topside fittings and rigging. Belowdecks, the engine is easily accessible, the cabin layout is sensible and not ostentatiously ornate. She has a genset, which is a plus, but no stove- a definite minus (one could easily be added, however). She's radar-equipped, no SSB or GPS. She would be a fine live-aboard and coastal cruiser, and should handle longer range cruising as the tankage is more than adequate. I'd like to research Cheoy Lee's more; I liked this boat. At an asking price of less than $60,000 she is well within my budget. Pacific Seacraft Crealock 34, 1990 Model: Nice boat; she has a spartan interior and a non-nonsense air about her. This boat is clearly designed for ocean passages. Living aboard would not be difficult, but again the boat is designed to go anywhere, not sit on a dock. At just under $100,000 she is out of my price range, so I didn't really seriously evaluate all her features. Cabo Rico 38, 1981 Model: She was once a nice boat, but neglect has sadly hurt her. The below $80,000 price reflects the condition she's in; it would take a lot of work to bring this boat up to snuff. The teak deck is shot. I would take a pass on this boat; I don't want a project. Tayana 37, 1982 Model: Wonderful boat, she has lots of room and is built like a tank. She has a Perkins, which I like as I have lots of experience with them. She's air-conditioned as well, a must in Texas. Very beamy and not at all claustrophobic, the boat is clearly designed for comfort and safety. She is equipped with a wind generator as well as a wind vane steering system. She has no navigation station; the large quarterberth is designed as an aft stateroom. I would prefer a nav station, but a fold down table sort of thing could be easily added by a carpenter. Electronics consists of an SSB; a radar and GPS system would have to be added (I am a Garmin GPS junkie, I'll freely admit that :) Her asking price of $85,000 is within my budget, though I would have to scrape for any planned add-ons. It should be apparent that the first and last boats I looked at were the two which appealed most to me. I have distinct reservations about a teak deck, and while the Cheoy Lee is not the dedicated ocean passage boat that the Tayana is, she would no doubt provide years of performance and satisfaction. The Tayana represents security, comfort, and hominess. She has many of the features I would like in a boat, and probably represents the better investment of the two. It's quite clear to me that I am not exactly sure what I want at this point in time, although I am sure that as I continue to research and actively start sailing that this will become self-evident before I buy. I understand now why searching for a boat can take quite some time. Wendy |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:31 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com