More on weight issues.
 

I suggest you drill some test holes in the floor. It's no big deal. Use a
1/4 bit and go into the foam and see what it pulls up. Fill them with epoxy
mixed with filler like micro balloons or chopped glass. If you only want to
buy a small quantity of materials go to a local hobby shop. They sell small
quantities of all that stuff. You can debate this all you want but you
won't know if it's water logged or not until you drill into it.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Ok, a little help here.

It appears that I was pretty close on the over weight issue -
according to the weights I was given by the manufacturer, the boat
must be 900 lbs overweight.

So, as I was thinking about this and my strange thoughts went to the
boat's data plate.

According to the data plate, the capacity of the boat is 1800 lbs.
That calculation is motor, people, fuel and gear.

Basically, the boat is 900 lbs overweight. That leaves 900 lbs
capacity. The engine weighs basically 500 lbs, leaving 400 lbs. 49
gallons of gas is 300 lbs. Leaving 100 lbs of capacity.

Three people, one at 250 lbs of rugged, handsome semi-retired,
semi-professional guide, the other two at 200 lbs each is 650 lbs. If
it were only the rugged, handsome semi-retired, semi-professional
guide it would be 150 lbs over capacity.

That would mean that the boat, when properly loaded, is 550 pounds
over capacity.

Yes/No?

More on weight issues.
 

So what do you figure are your other options for finding out if the foam is
waterlogged or not?

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:35:58 GMT, "James" wrote:

I suggest you drill some test holes in the floor. It's no big deal. Use
a
1/4 bit and go into the foam and see what it pulls up. Fill them with
epoxy
mixed with filler like micro balloons or chopped glass. If you only want
to
buy a small quantity of materials go to a local hobby shop. They sell
small
quantities of all that stuff. You can debate this all you want but you
won't know if it's water logged or not until you drill into it.

True, but I ain't drilling holes in that boat until ilt's absoutely
necessary.

You can be as cavalier about my boat as you want, but it's my boat and
there ain't no way I'm going to drill holes on purpose on a perfectly
maintained boat just to find something out.

I'll exhaust all other options before we get to that.

More on weight issues.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:50:47 GMT, "James" wrote:

So what do you figure are your other options for finding out if the
foam is
waterlogged or not?

I was thinking maybe NDT - maybe ultrasound or xray or something.

Is there an rf/microwave type water detector? drill a tiny hole in an
out of the way place and stick a couple of wires down and measure
resistance? dry foam probably very high, wet foam lower.

I also have heard of internal drainage channels being accidently blocked
at the factory by a little piece of something. Is there a path whereby
water is supposed to drain from the front to the back, under the floor?

After all, we are talking about the equivilent of a couple inches of
water over the entire deck area of the boat. maybe a little less.

More on weight issues.
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:26:28 -0500, "Del Cecchi"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:50:47 GMT, "James" wrote:

So what do you figure are your other options for finding out if the
foam is
waterlogged or not?

I was thinking maybe NDT - maybe ultrasound or xray or something.

Is there an rf/microwave type water detector? drill a tiny hole in an
out of the way place and stick a couple of wires down and measure
resistance? dry foam probably very high, wet foam lower.

I also have heard of internal drainage channels being accidently
blocked
at the factory by a little piece of something. Is there a path whereby
water is supposed to drain from the front to the back, under the floor?

Exactly although the way the hull is made, it's pretty much a straight
shot from the storage drains to the hull and out through the drain
plug - or so I've been told. I'm going down to the boat tomorrow with
some light weight, four foot stainless steel rod that I use for making
spinners and plumb out the drains.

I just thought of that in fact while watching - get this -
Mythbusters. :)

After all, we are talking about the equivilent of a couple inches of
water over the entire deck area of the boat. maybe a little less.

About 100 gallons - which, based on my calculations (width of the
boat), could be as much as three inches of water worst case if
contained in one area - which is defiantly not the case.

I don't know- we'll see.

The case I recall, there were tubes through bulkheads or stringers or
whatever they used to strengthen the hull on the inside. One got plugged
somehow. Water puddled ahead of it. Got anything longer than 4 feet?
Electrical fish tape might do it.

How much would you dare pick up the nose of the boat and trailer with a
hoist to see if any water ran out?

Just brainstorming here.

del

More on weight issues.
 

Tom,

I hope you sort this out quickly and cheaply. You boat probs along with our
Red Sox probs must be a real drag. At least the Sox are winning at this
moment...it's only the 5th inning though...

--Mike

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 21:19:39 -0500, "Del Cecchi"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:26:28 -0500, "Del Cecchi"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:50:47 GMT, "James" wrote:

So what do you figure are your other options for finding out if the
foam is
waterlogged or not?

I was thinking maybe NDT - maybe ultrasound or xray or something.

Is there an rf/microwave type water detector? drill a tiny hole in an
out of the way place and stick a couple of wires down and measure
resistance? dry foam probably very high, wet foam lower.

I also have heard of internal drainage channels being accidently
blocked
at the factory by a little piece of something. Is there a path whereby
water is supposed to drain from the front to the back, under the floor?

Exactly although the way the hull is made, it's pretty much a straight
shot from the storage drains to the hull and out through the drain
plug - or so I've been told. I'm going down to the boat tomorrow with
some light weight, four foot stainless steel rod that I use for making
spinners and plumb out the drains.

I just thought of that in fact while watching - get this -
Mythbusters. :)

After all, we are talking about the equivilent of a couple inches of
water over the entire deck area of the boat. maybe a little less.

About 100 gallons - which, based on my calculations (width of the
boat), could be as much as three inches of water worst case if
contained in one area - which is defiantly not the case.

I don't know- we'll see.

The case I recall, there were tubes through bulkheads or stringers or
whatever they used to strengthen the hull on the inside. One got plugged
somehow. Water puddled ahead of it. Got anything longer than 4 feet?
Electrical fish tape might do it.

I do have a small fish tape that might do the trick. I'll take it
along tomorrow.

How much would you dare pick up the nose of the boat and trailer with a
hoist to see if any water ran out?

Already done that actually - parked it on a ten degree hill.

Just brainstorming here.

10-4.

More on weight issues.
 

I'm thinking you're dreaming about the xray :-)

I replaced the floor and some stringers in my 1990 bowrider. It was
built with the traditional wood stringers and ply floor. Under the
floor the original structure was more like a grid than traditional
stringers. The interspaces between the grid was filled with expanding
foam via holes in the floor. The holes were then plugged. What I
noticed when I removed the floor was that the foam did not perfectly
fill each compartment. Since they fill via a hole there is no way for
them to really verify that each one is filled completely. A number of
them had some water that had eventualy penetrated. Particularly where
interior parts had been attached to the floor via wood screws. The
water never had a chance to get out so it eventually migrated through
the fiberglass and saturated the wood. No way was there anywhere near
900lbs of water involved though. Probably more like 50. The floor had
a few soft spots. Test holes in the stringers brought up wood mush. I
ended up replacing the outer stringers and reinforcing the inner
stringers. After removing everything I was going to remove I left it
to dry for about 8 weeks with fans blowing on it. I saturated all the
wood that was left with lots of thinned epoxy through holes drilled
into it. I know it's controversial but I did not put any foam back in.
I rebuilt with a more traditional stringer design and added drain
holes though all the stringers at the transom so that any water that
gets into it simply drains to the bilge. I also put 8" access holes in
the rear between the stringers so I could make sure that the drains did
not clog. In truth I probably could have just gone on using the boat.
Even with the water and wood rot it seemed structurally sound. I think
most of them were laid up with enough fiberglass to compensate for the
eventual loss of structural strength in the wood.


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:50:47 GMT, "James" wrote:

So what do you figure are your other options for finding out if the foam is
waterlogged or not?

I was thinking maybe NDT - maybe ultrasound or xray or something.

More on weight issues.
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:18:46 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

Microwave the boat. Where the steam erupts is where the water is
stored. :)

ROTFL!!!



I've got it.

Saddam Hussein's WMDs...

They've been stashed inside your boat's hull.


Could be. Has your boat been to Syria, Tom?

More on weight issues.
 

What's your basis for this theory? Are the stringers not wood? What's
the floor made of?

I missed the start of this I think. How old is this boat?

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 24 Aug 2006 05:50:02 -0700, "jamesgangnc"
wrote:

I'm thinking you're dreaming about the xray :-)

I replaced the floor and some stringers in my 1990 bowrider. It was
built with the traditional wood stringers and ply floor. Under the
floor the original structure was more like a grid than traditional
stringers. The interspaces between the grid was filled with expanding
foam via holes in the floor. The holes were then plugged. What I
noticed when I removed the floor was that the foam did not perfectly
fill each compartment. Since they fill via a hole there is no way for
them to really verify that each one is filled completely. A number of
them had some water that had eventualy penetrated. Particularly where
interior parts had been attached to the floor via wood screws. The
water never had a chance to get out so it eventually migrated through
the fiberglass and saturated the wood. No way was there anywhere near
900lbs of water involved though. Probably more like 50. The floor had
a few soft spots. Test holes in the stringers brought up wood mush. I
ended up replacing the outer stringers and reinforcing the inner
stringers. After removing everything I was going to remove I left it
to dry for about 8 weeks with fans blowing on it. I saturated all the
wood that was left with lots of thinned epoxy through holes drilled
into it. I know it's controversial but I did not put any foam back in.
I rebuilt with a more traditional stringer design and added drain
holes though all the stringers at the transom so that any water that
gets into it simply drains to the bilge. I also put 8" access holes in
the rear between the stringers so I could make sure that the drains did
not clog. In truth I probably could have just gone on using the boat.
Even with the water and wood rot it seemed structurally sound. I think
most of them were laid up with enough fiberglass to compensate for the
eventual loss of structural strength in the wood.

The boat hull is solid fiberglass - no wood.

In theory, there wouldn't be any problem with stringers.

In theory. :)

More on weight issues.
 

That's cool. All you have to worry about is the foam being saturated and I
really have trouble believing that any foam could hold anything even
remotely appoaching the weight your think is an issue. Even with all the
wet spots and rotten wood I removed from my boat I think there couldn't have
really been more than 10 gallons of water total. 900 lbs is well over a 100
gallons of water and that's about 2 average sized bath tubs.

I guess the other alternative is that your boat was laid up really heavy.
That's not entirely a bad thing since if it is true it's solid as a rock.
Or the builder was way off on their published weight. Not sure anything
elas is left????

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 24 Aug 2006 12:45:19 -0700, "jamesgangnc"
wrote:

What's your basis for this theory?

Because that's the way it's built - no wood.

Are the stringers not wood?

No - fiberglass.

What's the floor made of?

Fiberglass.

I missed the start of this I think.

Yep.

How old is this boat?

Six years old.

More on weight issues.
 

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:14:35 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

What's the floor made of?

Fiberglass.

I'd be surprised if the floors and hull do not have some sort of
non-fiberglass core - either wood or foam. You end up with a really
heavy boat right from the factory otherwise.

More on weight issues.
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:14:35 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

What's the floor made of?

Fiberglass.

I'd be surprised if the floors and hull do not have some sort of
non-fiberglass core - either wood or foam. You end up with a really
heavy boat right from the factory otherwise.


I've got a Scout 20.5 Sportsfish CC that is touted to be completely
fiberglass ... no wood in stringers.
Dry Weight w/o engine is 2,000 lbs.

Eisboch

More on weight issues.
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:27:29 GMT, "James" wrote:

That's cool. All you have to worry about is the foam being saturated
and I really have trouble believing that any foam could hold anything
even remotely appoaching the weight your think is an issue.

I think it's a combination of things - some soaked foam and residual
water being held in the bow somewhere.

I'm having the hull gone through with one of those fancy moisture
meters that reads through the hull.

We'll see.


Radioactive dye...that's the ticket.
Where would you be without my helpful ideas.

A hell of a lot closer to solving the problem.

More on weight issues.
 

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:41:39 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I've got a Scout 20.5 Sportsfish CC that is touted to be completely
fiberglass ... no wood in stringers.
Dry Weight w/o engine is 2,000 lbs.

No wood in stringers is different however from no wood anywhere.

Fiberglass stringers are usually built around a foam core just to give
them the required shape. A solid fiberglass floor is difficult to
make without either excessive weight or too much flexibility.

More on weight issues.
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:41:39 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I've got a Scout 20.5 Sportsfish CC that is touted to be completely
fiberglass ... no wood in stringers.
Dry Weight w/o engine is 2,000 lbs.

No wood in stringers is different however from no wood anywhere.

Fiberglass stringers are usually built around a foam core just to give
them the required shape. A solid fiberglass floor is difficult to
make without either excessive weight or too much flexibility.


Unless it has more molded risers supporting the deck, which, as you point
out adds more weight.
BTW ... the Scout is 100% wood free. Some type of composite material is
used for the stringers and transom. They have a unique way of building
them.

http://www.scoutboats.com/quality.html


Eisboch

More on weight issues.
 

I have seen that more and more builders are avoiding wood completely.
I've seen some stringers that are basically just strips of fiberglass.
Foam cores are just as bad as wood imho. It doesn't matter how good a
job is done covering the wood or foam because polyester resin is not
water proof. Water eventually will migrate through polyester resin.
Foam doesn't rot at least.

I'm still having trouble seeing 900lbs of water anywhere in a boat that
size. You'd have to be wading in it.


Eisboch wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:41:39 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I've got a Scout 20.5 Sportsfish CC that is touted to be completely
fiberglass ... no wood in stringers.
Dry Weight w/o engine is 2,000 lbs.

No wood in stringers is different however from no wood anywhere.

Fiberglass stringers are usually built around a foam core just to give
them the required shape. A solid fiberglass floor is difficult to
make without either excessive weight or too much flexibility.


Unless it has more molded risers supporting the deck, which, as you point
out adds more weight.
BTW ... the Scout is 100% wood free. Some type of composite material is
used for the stringers and transom. They have a unique way of building
them.

http://www.scoutboats.com/quality.html


Eisboch

More on weight issues.
 

True. Also, on larger vessels, trim tanks are used to obtain optimum fore
and aft and side to side trim. In a former life a vessel of mine had trim
and ballast tanks. We used fresh water for ballast vs fuel. Safer and
cheaper, eh?

Butch
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:41:39 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I've got a Scout 20.5 Sportsfish CC that is touted to be completely
fiberglass ... no wood in stringers.
Dry Weight w/o engine is 2,000 lbs.

No wood in stringers is different however from no wood anywhere.

Fiberglass stringers are usually built around a foam core just to give
them the required shape. A solid fiberglass floor is difficult to
make without either excessive weight or too much flexibility.


Many modern manufacturers use a foam core instead of plywood for the decks
but some, including Parker, still use plywood. Parker uses XL ply encased
in fiberglass. I saw some being built. The company is careful and
fastidious and makes sure no "bare wood" is exposed, even though XL
treated wood is resistant to rot. The wood, though, does add substantially
to the dry weight of the boat.

But weight, even on a planing boat, is not necessarily the devil's curse.
Most of the charter captains around here who drive the 46-footers want as
much weight as is practicable down low in the hull to help their boats
take on our nasty chop here in Chesapeake Bay. They'll sometimes spec much
more tankage than they really need, just to have the ability to add fuel
as "ballast" when conditions require.