Trip called off...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.

Trip called off...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.


I am not saying anything.

Eisboch

Trip called off...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.


I am not saying anything.

Eisboch


Well, maybe I will. Before Mainship became part of Luhrs they used to make
many models including sedans and trawlers. We looked at a couple of the
sedans several years ago and didn't care for them for a number of reasons.
I think now, as part of Luhrs they have reduced the Mainship models to a
Pilothouse series and a Trawler series. I really like the Trawler series.
Haven't seen any of the Pilothouses.

Eisboch

Trip called off...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.


I am not saying anything.

Eisboch

Did I miss a 4 day discussion about this? :-(

Last year, I stopped at a local marina to pick up some polyester snakes, and
I was stopped dead in my tracks by a Mainship trawler in the yard. Gorgeous
boat. A salesman came out of the office to ask if I was interested. I said I
was, but my bank account was not. He said he was nuts about the boat, and
rolled a ladder up to it & said "Take a look anyway - maybe you'll become
obsessed with it". Even the smallest details were damn near perfect.

Trip called off...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.


I am not saying anything.

Eisboch


Well, maybe I will. Before Mainship became part of Luhrs they used to
make many models including sedans and trawlers. We looked at a couple of
the sedans several years ago and didn't care for them for a number of
reasons. I think now, as part of Luhrs they have reduced the Mainship
models to a Pilothouse series and a Trawler series. I really like the
Trawler series. Haven't seen any of the Pilothouses.

Eisboch


Although we're all capable of evaluating these things objectively, I wonder
sometimes if a boat looks more attractive because it's a type you rarely see
in your area. Here, the one I saw stood out as unique because it was not a
bubble boat. And, it reminded me of my dad's 32 ft Luhrs.

Trip called off...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...



Although we're all capable of evaluating these things objectively, I
wonder sometimes if a boat looks more attractive because it's a type you
rarely see in your area. Here, the one I saw stood out as unique because
it was not a bubble boat. And, it reminded me of my dad's 32 ft Luhrs.



When we were shopping for our first new boat we must have looked at over a
dozen different manufacturers and did some basic research on all of them.
Then, one day, I saw the Navigator sitting on the hard in a dealership. I
had never seen one or even heard of one ... I knew absolutely nothing about
them. So, I started doing some research on the history and asking around.
Being a west coast boat, very few here on the east knew anything about them.
What was impressing me about it was how it was built, particularly in the
engine room. Compared to other manufacturers of the same approximate sized
boat everything seemed heavy duty, including the stringers. It's not as
fancy in terms of finish work in the cabins and staterooms as some others,
but it's neat and cleanly done.

Anyway, we continued looking around and then ran into a old salt who ran
boats back and forth to Florida for the owners. Many of the boats he ran are
very well known and have excellent reputations. I asked him which, of all
the boats he had made the run in over the years, would be his choice as
being the best all around. He answered, "A west coast boat called a
Navigator". Up until this point he had no idea we had looked at one. When
I told him, he spent some time telling us sea tales of some of his trips and
the performance of the Navigator in heavy seas.

So, we went back and looked harder at it. Hired a surveyor who confirmed my
layman's observation of the stout nature of the hull. Broke out the
checkbook and we've enjoyed it very much since.

Eisboch

Trip called off...
 

Harry Krause wrote:


BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on. Those in the broker business will try to convince you it is
"only cosmetic," but it can have a far greater impact than that. I was
looking at a boat that had had some blistering repaired and noticed that
more pustules were breaking out elsewhere.


Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.

David Pascoe, a surveyor who hates dealers and brokers as much as
anybody possibly could, has written that the idea the blisters damage
the structural integrity of a boat is a "misperception" and states that
after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity. By my math, that's 0.25%- hardly the sort of
probability that should foster a rule of thumb "run away quickly if you
spot a blister". If a prospective buyer hires a decent surveyor and the
blisters are classified as "cosmetic", there would be no reason to pass
on a boat that was otherwise attractive. In fact, it's pretty common to
demand a further discount once blisters are discovered (most of the
time they are under the waterline and won't be seen until the survey
haulout), and then once the deal closes boat for many many years
without doing a darn thing about the unsightly but harmless pimples on
the bottom.

Pascoe's entire text on the subject:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/BuyingBlisterBoat.htm


Please elaborate on your rule of thumb.

Trip called off...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.


I am not saying anything.

Eisboch

Did I miss a 4 day discussion about this? :-(

Last year, I stopped at a local marina to pick up some polyester snakes, and
I was stopped dead in my tracks by a Mainship trawler in the yard. Gorgeous
boat. A salesman came out of the office to ask if I was interested. I said I
was, but my bank account was not. He said he was nuts about the boat, and
rolled a ladder up to it & said "Take a look anyway - maybe you'll become
obsessed with it". Even the smallest details were damn near perfect.


You're far too easily impressed, IMO.

Mainship builds a good boat, better than many, but it definitely should
not compete in the elite class. The Mainship franchise has wandered
around from brokerage to brokerage in this region for about the last
ten years, and among the reasons one hears for this is frequently
"quality control issues."

Maybe their express style lobster and picnic boats are different or
better than their trawlers. We only see the trawlers in any number up
this way- and not really even that many of those.

Would I buy a Mainship? Maybe, for the right price, but I wouldn't
describe the boat as "damn near perfect". "Better than average in many
ways" would be a lot closer, IMO.

Trip called off...
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Oh well - the trip to see the Mainships is called off. We set up for
Thursday morning - the broker is sick or something.

Time out! When did a Mainships become a candidate? Which one are you
drooling over? Them there is some nice boats.


I am not saying anything.

Eisboch

Did I miss a 4 day discussion about this? :-(

Last year, I stopped at a local marina to pick up some polyester snakes,
and
I was stopped dead in my tracks by a Mainship trawler in the yard.
Gorgeous
boat. A salesman came out of the office to ask if I was interested. I
said I
was, but my bank account was not. He said he was nuts about the boat, and
rolled a ladder up to it & said "Take a look anyway - maybe you'll become
obsessed with it". Even the smallest details were damn near perfect.


You're far too easily impressed, IMO.

Mainship builds a good boat, better than many, but it definitely should
not compete in the elite class. The Mainship franchise has wandered
around from brokerage to brokerage in this region for about the last
ten years, and among the reasons one hears for this is frequently
"quality control issues."

Maybe their express style lobster and picnic boats are different or
better than their trawlers. We only see the trawlers in any number up
this way- and not really even that many of those.

Would I buy a Mainship? Maybe, for the right price, but I wouldn't
describe the boat as "damn near perfect". "Better than average in many
ways" would be a lot closer, IMO.


I wasn't aware of the quality issues, like the ones Harry mentioned. It was
a 10 minute romance. Fortunately, I'm crazy when it comes to researching
large purchases, so I probabably would've had it surveyed 37 times.

Trip called off...
 

Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in the
30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page essay, single
spaced.

Trip called off...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in the
30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page essay, single
spaced.

Yes.

Trip called off...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in the
30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page essay, single
spaced.

Yes.


You get an A minus.

Trip called off...
 

Harry Krause wrote:
BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on.

Depends on the boat, depends on the blisters.


Chuck Gould wrote:
Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.


I dunno about "far greater" impact, but one certainly sould
not take it for granted. After all, a fiberglass boat has a
great deal of structural integrity depending on the skin.
That means any diminution of the skin is diminishing the
structure, no?



David Pascoe

ummm, yeah. Him.

One might want to take his web site with a grain of salt. He
thinks diesel engines have spark plugs and that pressboard
is the same as laminated composite.


after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity.

Measured how?

I've seen blisters that were in the paint and not affecting
the fiberglass at all; I've seen some that were in the
surface and either did not affect the strength, or affected
it very very little... and some that certainly would affect
the structural integrity of the boat, since they were almost
baseball-sized craters.

As for claims of affecting or not affecting the strength,
the only way to tell would be to place a load on the hull
and measure the deflection, then compare that result to a
similar test result done when the boat was new.

Most boats do not get such loads under normal use, which is
why you don't hear much about blistered boats crumpling at
sea. OTOH to buy a severely blistered boat and head around
Cape Horn, just to prove the boat's strength, would probably
not be smart.

Fair Skies
Doug King

Trip called off...
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
On 11/7/2006 12:02 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in
the 30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page essay,
single spaced.
Yes.


You get an A minus.


Here's an interesting site:

http://www.billmunsonboats.com/

I was thinking of more stylish, traditional hulls, like my magnificent Lund
yacht, but bigger.

Trip called off...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
On 11/7/2006 12:02 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in
the 30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page essay,
single spaced.
Yes.


You get an A minus.


Here's an interesting site:

http://www.billmunsonboats.com/

I was thinking of more stylish, traditional hulls, like my magnificent
Lund yacht, but bigger.



http://www.winninghoff.com/pho9mbass.htm

Trip called off...
 

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Harry Krause wrote:
BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on.

Depends on the boat, depends on the blisters.


Chuck Gould wrote:
Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.


I dunno about "far greater" impact, but one certainly sould not take it
for granted. After all, a fiberglass boat has a great deal of structural
integrity depending on the skin. That means any diminution of the skin is
diminishing the structure, no?



David Pascoe

ummm, yeah. Him.

One might want to take his web site with a grain of salt. He thinks diesel
engines have spark plugs and that pressboard is the same as laminated
composite.


after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity.

Measured how?

I've seen blisters that were in the paint and not affecting the fiberglass
at all; I've seen some that were in the surface and either did not affect
the strength, or affected it very very little... and some that certainly
would affect the structural integrity of the boat, since they were almost
baseball-sized craters.

As for claims of affecting or not affecting the strength, the only way to
tell would be to place a load on the hull and measure the deflection, then
compare that result to a similar test result done when the boat was new.

Most boats do not get such loads under normal use, which is why you don't
hear much about blistered boats crumpling at sea. OTOH to buy a severely
blistered boat and head around Cape Horn, just to prove the boat's
strength, would probably not be smart.

Fair Skies
Doug King


I think the biggest effect blisters have is on the boat's resale value.

Eisboch

Trip called off...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
On 11/7/2006 12:02 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in
the 30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page essay,
single spaced.
Yes.


You get an A minus.


Here's an interesting site:

http://www.billmunsonboats.com/

I was thinking of more stylish, traditional hulls, like my magnificent
Lund yacht, but bigger.

http://www.fairmetalboats.com/

Eisboch

Trip called off...
 

Harry Krause wrote:
On 11/7/2006 9:51 AM, Chuck Gould wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on. Those in the broker business will try to convince you it is
"only cosmetic," but it can have a far greater impact than that. I was
looking at a boat that had had some blistering repaired and noticed that
more pustules were breaking out elsewhere.


Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.

David Pascoe, a surveyor who hates dealers and brokers as much as
anybody possibly could, has written that the idea the blisters damage
the structural integrity of a boat is a "misperception" and states that
after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity. By my math, that's 0.25%- hardly the sort of
probability that should foster a rule of thumb "run away quickly if you
spot a blister". If a prospective buyer hires a decent surveyor and the
blisters are classified as "cosmetic", there would be no reason to pass
on a boat that was otherwise attractive. In fact, it's pretty common to
demand a further discount once blisters are discovered (most of the
time they are under the waterline and won't be seen until the survey
haulout), and then once the deal closes boat for many many years
without doing a darn thing about the unsightly but harmless pimples on
the bottom.

Pascoe's entire text on the subject:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/BuyingBlisterBoat.htm


Please elaborate on your rule of thumb.



Not worth the effort, but here is someone else's opinion. Note the
reference to delamination. SeaView site.



Glad you liked that Seaview article, it happens to be one of mine. I
did that interview with Phil for the magazine several years ago, and
they use it for their website.

When I had my boat in for its redo last spring, I had planned to have
the bottom completely stripped, a barrier coat applied, and new bottom
paint. Seaview stopped stripping off the old bottom paint when they
found some blisters. At no charge to me (at least for that) they did
some "test peels" where the skin out mat was removed and the laminate
below was examined. In each and every area tested there was *no*
evidence of delam below the mat, and that is the case in the
overwhelming majority of boats with gelcoat blisters. Seaview didn't
want to proceed with a barrier coat because of the possibilty that
blisters might continue to form and that could be confused with a
warranty issue in the future, but even Seaview agreed that there would
be no need to address the blisters unless I was concerned about
cosmetics.

Blistering can be evidence of delam, but there is no basis to conclude
that whenever one sees a blister there is likely delamination as well.
Nor is there any evidence that blistering will "lead to" delamination.

Thereby leading to my opinion and an opinion shared by a probable
majority of people who have looked into the blistering issue; in most
cases a blister is entirely cosmetic and a decent surveyor will be able
to tell a prospective buyer whether a specific case of blisters might
be that rare situation where the blisters are a visible indicator of a
deeper and structural problem.

Trip called off...
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...


Glad you liked that Seaview article, it happens to be one of mine.

..

Trip called off...
 

You could peel all the gelcoat off a fiberglass boat and throw it away,
without sacrificing any structural integrity. Gelcoat is a porous,
cosmetic, alternative to paint.

When you find "baseball sized craters" on a boat, you're dealing with
an extreme situation that goes well beyond cosmetic gelcoat blisters. I
would agree that a boat with baseball sized craters should be avoided,
but that's not what one finds in most cases. I diagree that gelcoat
blisters are a "kiss of death" that should take any boat with typical
cosmetic blistering out of consideration.

Trip called off...
 

ACP wrote:
http://www.winninghoff.com/pho9mbass.htm


Now *that* is a classy boat.

DSK

Trip called off...
 

Eisboch wrote:
I think the biggest effect blisters have is on the boat's resale value.


Yep ;)

And the market place is NEVER wrong!!

DSK

Trip called off...
 

Pascoe is a boob...and has been run off every serious boating forum that he
used to post to.


"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

Harry Krause wrote:


BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on. Those in the broker business will try to convince you it is
"only cosmetic," but it can have a far greater impact than that. I was
looking at a boat that had had some blistering repaired and noticed that
more pustules were breaking out elsewhere.


Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.

David Pascoe, a surveyor who hates dealers and brokers as much as
anybody possibly could, has written that the idea the blisters damage
the structural integrity of a boat is a "misperception" and states that
after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity. By my math, that's 0.25%- hardly the sort of
probability that should foster a rule of thumb "run away quickly if you
spot a blister". If a prospective buyer hires a decent surveyor and the
blisters are classified as "cosmetic", there would be no reason to pass
on a boat that was otherwise attractive. In fact, it's pretty common to
demand a further discount once blisters are discovered (most of the
time they are under the waterline and won't be seen until the survey
haulout), and then once the deal closes boat for many many years
without doing a darn thing about the unsightly but harmless pimples on
the bottom.

Pascoe's entire text on the subject:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/BuyingBlisterBoat.htm


Please elaborate on your rule of thumb.

Trip called off...
 

Chuck Gould wrote:

You could peel all the gelcoat off a fiberglass boat and throw it away,
without sacrificing any structural integrity. Gelcoat is a porous,
cosmetic, alternative to paint.


Sure, but until you carefully pop & peel *every* blister on
the boat, you have no idea how big and/or bad they are.


When you find "baseball sized craters" on a boat, you're dealing with
an extreme situation that goes well beyond cosmetic gelcoat blisters. I
would agree that a boat with baseball sized craters should be avoided,
but that's not what one finds in most cases.

Agreed.

However, it takes a good bit of skilled labor to investigate
& determine the extent of the blistering. The baseball sized
craters looked like pinky nail sized pocks when the boat was
first hauled. Of course, over the next couple days they
swelled & began smelling like vinegar (a really bad sign);
but until the owner had invested about a weeks worth of
labor into opening them up, he had no clue the size of the
problem he was faced with.


... I diagree that gelcoat
blisters are a "kiss of death" that should take any boat with typical
cosmetic blistering out of consideration.


Again, depends on the boat. If it was sitting right next to
a sistership, asking only a slight percent higher price (or
a common enough production boat), I'd recommend not looking
back. If the boat was something special, worth the work
(because it's always more than just a matter of money) to
make sure of, then I'd recommend careful consideration of
the blistered boat.

It's worse to see abot with evidence of improperly repaired
blisters. **THAT** would be the kiss of death. And I (a
confirmed snob, true) would not trust any blister repair job
unless I personally witnessed every step of the job.

Blisters are just one more complication in an already
complex world. The worst thing about blisters is the
diversity of opinions about them, and the doubtfulness of
any previous repair.

Fair Skies
Doug King

Trip called off...
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

On 11/7/2006 9:51 AM, Chuck Gould wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:


BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on. Those in the broker business will try to convince you it is
"only cosmetic," but it can have a far greater impact than that. I was
looking at a boat that had had some blistering repaired and noticed that
more pustules were breaking out elsewhere.


Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.

David Pascoe, a surveyor who hates dealers and brokers as much as
anybody possibly could, has written that the idea the blisters damage
the structural integrity of a boat is a "misperception" and states that
after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity. By my math, that's 0.25%- hardly the sort of
probability that should foster a rule of thumb "run away quickly if you
spot a blister". If a prospective buyer hires a decent surveyor and the
blisters are classified as "cosmetic", there would be no reason to pass
on a boat that was otherwise attractive. In fact, it's pretty common to
demand a further discount once blisters are discovered (most of the
time they are under the waterline and won't be seen until the survey
haulout), and then once the deal closes boat for many many years
without doing a darn thing about the unsightly but harmless pimples on
the bottom.

Pascoe's entire text on the subject:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/BuyingBlisterBoat.htm


Please elaborate on your rule of thumb.



Not worth the effort, but here is someone else's opinion. Note the
reference to delamination. SeaView site.




Glad you liked that Seaview article, it happens to be one of mine. I
did that interview with Phil for the magazine several years ago, and
they use it for their website.

When I had my boat in for its redo last spring, I had planned to have
the bottom completely stripped, a barrier coat applied, and new bottom
paint. Seaview stopped stripping off the old bottom paint when they
found some blisters. At no charge to me (at least for that) they did
some "test peels" where the skin out mat was removed and the laminate
below was examined. In each and every area tested there was *no*
evidence of delam below the mat, and that is the case in the
overwhelming majority of boats with gelcoat blisters. Seaview didn't
want to proceed with a barrier coat because of the possibilty that
blisters might continue to form and that could be confused with a
warranty issue in the future, but even Seaview agreed that there would
be no need to address the blisters unless I was concerned about
cosmetics.

Blistering can be evidence of delam, but there is no basis to conclude
that whenever one sees a blister there is likely delamination as well.
Nor is there any evidence that blistering will "lead to" delamination.

Thereby leading to my opinion and an opinion shared by a probable
majority of people who have looked into the blistering issue; in most
cases a blister is entirely cosmetic and a decent surveyor will be able
to tell a prospective buyer whether a specific case of blisters might
be that rare situation where the blisters are a visible indicator of a
deeper and structural problem.


"it happens to be one of mine" Love it Chuck:-)

Clearly peeling various depths including the glass laminates
themselves, to exploratory check "if" the blisters are cosmetic or other
is always the best way, but somewhat destructive & if now properly
repaired can cause more harm than the original blister(s); however FYI
here some surveyors still use & swear by, those sophisticated electronic
moisture detectors.

They definitely can detect moisture below the hull surface indeed
depending on the setting can read straight through most fibreglass hulls
(even the bilge, builtin tanks etc need to be totally dry). They can
track the perimeter of the moisture reading & give it an outline
(usually drawn on the hull in texta). If it's substantially bigger than
the blister itself then they go exploratory digging, but if it's
consistently over numerous blisters "just" the blister that contains
moisture then it's declared cosmetic.

Very few glass strands in a laminate, the strands being what the
moisture travels along, go vertically "through" the hull scantling but
they are always oriented along the hull in the layers.

Care & ingredient X (experience?) are always needed because sometimes
the size of the blister is oft little related to the moisture below.
i.e.a small surface blister can sometimes when checked with a meter have
moisture well out from it irregularly patterned literally like a cancer
growth.

K

Trip called off...
 

On 7 Nov 2006 09:49:11 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:
On 11/7/2006 9:51 AM, Chuck Gould wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

BTW, no matter what anyone tells you or what you read, if you see
evidence of osmotic blistering on a boat you are thinking of buying,
move on. Those in the broker business will try to convince you it is
"only cosmetic," but it can have a far greater impact than that. I was
looking at a boat that had had some blistering repaired and noticed that
more pustules were breaking out elsewhere.


Please do tell how the typical gelcoat blisters found on most used
boats have a "far greater impact" than cosmetic.

David Pascoe, a surveyor who hates dealers and brokers as much as
anybody possibly could, has written that the idea the blisters damage
the structural integrity of a boat is a "misperception" and states that
after examining 4000 used boats with some degree of blistering he found
only about 10 where the blisters actually created an issue with
structural integrity. By my math, that's 0.25%- hardly the sort of
probability that should foster a rule of thumb "run away quickly if you
spot a blister". If a prospective buyer hires a decent surveyor and the
blisters are classified as "cosmetic", there would be no reason to pass
on a boat that was otherwise attractive. In fact, it's pretty common to
demand a further discount once blisters are discovered (most of the
time they are under the waterline and won't be seen until the survey
haulout), and then once the deal closes boat for many many years
without doing a darn thing about the unsightly but harmless pimples on
the bottom.

Pascoe's entire text on the subject:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/BuyingBlisterBoat.htm


Please elaborate on your rule of thumb.



Not worth the effort, but here is someone else's opinion. Note the
reference to delamination. SeaView site.



Glad you liked that Seaview article, it happens to be one of mine. I
did that interview with Phil for the magazine several years ago, and
they use it for their website.

When I had my boat in for its redo last spring, I had planned to have
the bottom completely stripped, a barrier coat applied, and new bottom
paint. Seaview stopped stripping off the old bottom paint when they
found some blisters. At no charge to me (at least for that) they did
some "test peels" where the skin out mat was removed and the laminate
below was examined. In each and every area tested there was *no*
evidence of delam below the mat, and that is the case in the
overwhelming majority of boats with gelcoat blisters. Seaview didn't
want to proceed with a barrier coat because of the possibilty that
blisters might continue to form and that could be confused with a
warranty issue in the future, but even Seaview agreed that there would
be no need to address the blisters unless I was concerned about
cosmetics.

Blistering can be evidence of delam, but there is no basis to conclude
that whenever one sees a blister there is likely delamination as well.
Nor is there any evidence that blistering will "lead to" delamination.

Thereby leading to my opinion and an opinion shared by a probable
majority of people who have looked into the blistering issue; in most
cases a blister is entirely cosmetic and a decent surveyor will be able
to tell a prospective buyer whether a specific case of blisters might
be that rare situation where the blisters are a visible indicator of a
deeper and structural problem.

Good article, too. Very informative.

Trip called off...
 

NOYB wrote:
Pascoe is a boob...and has been run off every serious boating forum that he
used to post to.



That doesn't make him wrong on *everything*, and his treatise on the
causes and significance of cosmetic gelcoat blisters is one of the best
things he ever produced.

My main heartburn with DP is his propensity for posting photos of boats
just beat to hell, and in many cases literally falling apart, without
disclosing that he was surveying the boats for various insurance
companies after hurricanes down in Florida. A boat that gets blown off
a rack storage unit, for example, and falls about 30 feet to land on
its beam on the asphalt below is being subjected to stresses and
impacts that 99% of boaters will never have to endure- unless they
strike log at 40mph- (sideways). There is at least one case where he
represents a botched repair, (heck, the materials don't even match), as
an example of shoddy construction techniques. He makes some errors when
describing mechanical systems (including the infamous "diesel
sparkplug" reference), but he is pretty well grounded in his technical
knowledge of laminates and other structural subjects, IMO.

If you've got some information that refutes DP's analysis of blisters,
(aside from "everybody knows" sort of comments or a disparaging
personal remark), bring it on. :-)

Trip called off...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
On 11/7/2006 12:02 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


Hang on tight! Sudden left turn: Does anyone make aluminum hulls in
the 30-ish foot range? If not, why not? Please provide a 3 page
essay, single spaced.
Yes.


You get an A minus.


Here's an interesting site:

http://www.billmunsonboats.com/

I was thinking of more stylish, traditional hulls, like my magnificent
Lund yacht, but bigger.

http://www.fairmetalboats.com/

Eisboch




http://www.acbboats.com/

www.harbercraft.com
http://www.bentzboats.com/

And lots of other Northwest boat builders. And a hell of a lot stonger and
nicer than a Lund.

Trip called off...
 

Calif Bill wrote:

And lots of other Northwest boat builders.

http://www.precisionweldboats.com/

Trip called off...
 

"-rick-" wrote in message
. ..
Calif Bill wrote:

And lots of other Northwest boat builders.

http://www.precisionweldboats.com/



I do not think Tom makes a 30'er. At least yet.