Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 4, 4:30?am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. Why would every boat in succession always have to be narrower and with a deeper V than previous models? Perhaps the new model is intended for slightly different conditions. Is it possible that the same changes that make the boat less "fishable" in your estimation might make it better suited for cruising and exploring or some other purpose? Albemarle builds boats that range up to 40-soome feet in length, and not all are intended exclusively for use by the weekend or retired fisherman. It may be that in order to increase total overall appeal and sales of the new model Albemarle decided to make it slightly less specialized......don't know this for a fact, simply stating a possibility. To build a good case for a decline in quality I think it takes a lot more than the appearance of a new hull design with different characteristics. Why not check out one of the new boats in person and see if fit, finish, hardware, workmanship aren't still up to traditional standards? I'll be getting underway on one of their new boats, just over 30-feet LOA, in the next week or so. The brand doesn't have the long history in this region that it enjoys back on the east coast, so I can't say that I will be able to compare it knowledgeably with the pre-2005 produciton- but a pretty thorough at-the-dock examination of one of the current boats a few months ago revealed no glaring defects or cheap-cut aspects- I thought the boat was pretty impressive overall and I am looking forward to the opportunity to learn even more about it. (The "Hatteras Collection" includes Hatteras, Cabo, and Albemarle. The Harrell family sold to Brunswick in 2005). |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Nov 4, 4:30?am, HK wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. Why would every boat in succession always have to be narrower and with a deeper V than previous models? Perhaps the new model is intended for slightly different conditions. Slightly different conditions? Like what, flats fishing? Dockside condos? There has been discussion for some time on the more serious "fishing" boards about the downturn in quality in Cabos by those who know them well, and the same is beginning to be said about Albemarles. These comments come from experienced owners who actually know something about these boats and others of their style. Guys who when they see a term like "composite construction" used to describe a hull tend to say, "composite what?" |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 4, 8:40?am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 4, 4:30?am, HK wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. Why would every boat in succession always have to be narrower and with a deeper V than previous models? Perhaps the new model is intended for slightly different conditions. Slightly different conditions? Like what, flats fishing? Dockside condos? There has been discussion for some time on the more serious "fishing" boards about the downturn in quality in Cabos by those who know them well, and the same is beginning to be said about Albemarles. These comments come from experienced owners who actually know something about these boats and others of their style. Guys who when they see a term like "composite construction" used to describe a hull tend to say, "composite what?"- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You keep expressing a concern regarding the term "composite." When I visit some of the local factories, the types and varieties of materials used by everybody is amazing in its diversity. Gone are the days when most boats were built simply from mulitple layers of glass strand cloth and resin. Space age materials such as Kevlar, and a wide variety of coring materials (going well beyond the traditional and problematic balsas and foams) are strategically included in the assembly of materials in the "dry" layup before the vaccuum-assisted infusion of resin. Many of these specialized synthetic materials are produced specficially for inclusion in a fibergalss hull. There was a time when differentiating between "hand rolled" and chopper gun FRP was sufficiently informative, but in an era of rapidly changing (and we hope "advancing") technology the general term "composite" is as useful as "hand laid" used to be. How many of these savvy fishermen would routinely demand to know "hand laid with what? How many layers at the keel, at the chine? What is the rove to resin ratio in the transom?" etc? As you like to view the boating world from the perspective of a fisherman, here's a link to an item that appeared in Sal****er Sportsman. It fills in many of the gaps for folks uneasy about the "new fangled" terms. :-) http://www.sal****ersportsman.com/ar...sp?ID=21012214 |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Nov 4, 8:40?am, HK wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 4, 4:30?am, HK wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. Why would every boat in succession always have to be narrower and with a deeper V than previous models? Perhaps the new model is intended for slightly different conditions. Slightly different conditions? Like what, flats fishing? Dockside condos? There has been discussion for some time on the more serious "fishing" boards about the downturn in quality in Cabos by those who know them well, and the same is beginning to be said about Albemarles. These comments come from experienced owners who actually know something about these boats and others of their style. Guys who when they see a term like "composite construction" used to describe a hull tend to say, "composite what?"- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You keep expressing a concern regarding the term "composite." Yes, well, the question wasn't about "composite," but composite *what*? I asked you that several times, and you never provided an answer. I can appreciate the use of foamboard as the filling of a fiberglass sandwich in the transom, but not in the hullsides or bottom. The only materials I think suitable for the fiberglass "hull" are the various cloths and resins, not foam or foam boards or fillers. |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 4, 9:10?am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 4, 8:40?am, HK wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 4, 4:30?am, HK wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. Why would every boat in succession always have to be narrower and with a deeper V than previous models? Perhaps the new model is intended for slightly different conditions. Slightly different conditions? Like what, flats fishing? Dockside condos? There has been discussion for some time on the more serious "fishing" boards about the downturn in quality in Cabos by those who know them well, and the same is beginning to be said about Albemarles. These comments come from experienced owners who actually know something about these boats and others of their style. Guys who when they see a term like "composite construction" used to describe a hull tend to say, "composite what?"- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You keep expressing a concern regarding the term "composite." Yes, well, the question wasn't about "composite," but composite *what*? I asked you that several times, and you never provided an answer. I can appreciate the use of foamboard as the filling of a fiberglass sandwich in the transom, but not in the hullsides or bottom. The only materials I think suitable for the fiberglass "hull" are the various cloths and resins, not foam or foam boards or fillers.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "Foam" is a poor choice below the waterline, but few of the specialized cellular structures I see included in dry layups can be properly characterized as a foam. With trade names like Corecell, Divinycell, and others, these materials are normally introduced in a flexible dry sheet, speicifically engineered to allow the most efficient and uniform distribution and penetrataion of resin during the vacuum infusion process There are channels of varying dimensions cut through the material to allow the resin to flow. As a general class, they do not absorb water. A "foam" core never really became in integral part of the laminate to the same degree that the modern "composite" materials do. Technology often advances faster than the human willingness to accept new ideas. Don't be surprised if the 1980's idea that "nothing but rove and resin can ever be used below the waterline" eventually begins to be supplanted by materials that have proven suitable for the purpose. At one time back in the 60's or early 70's a local boat builder (Fairliner) produced a series of boats that had fiberglass gunwales but were plywood or planked from the chines to the keel. The marketing pitch of the day was that they had "no fiberglass below the waterline!" They sold pretty well to aging boaters who weren't entirely ready to trust that experimental new material of the day, fiberglass. :-) If it were just about building a boat as cheaply as possible, some of the techniques used to produce the lower end FRP hulls in the past were quite likely cheaper than vaccuum infused composite construction. |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
Harry Krause wrote: You keep expressing a concern regarding the term "composite." Yes, well, the question wasn't about "composite," but composite *what*? I asked you that several times, and you never provided an answer. I can appreciate the use of foamboard as the filling of a fiberglass sandwich in the transom, but not in the hullsides or bottom. The only materials I think suitable for the fiberglass "hull" are the various cloths and resins, not foam or foam boards or fillers.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - "Foam" is a poor choice below the waterline, but few of the specialized cellular structures I see included in dry layups can be properly characterized as a foam. With trade names like Corecell, Divinycell, and others, these materials are normally introduced in a flexible dry sheet, speicifically engineered to allow the most efficient and uniform distribution and penetrataion of resin during the vacuum infusion process There are channels of varying dimensions cut through the material to allow the resin to flow. As a general class, they do not absorb water. A "foam" core never really became in integral part of the laminate to the same degree that the modern "composite" materials do. Yes, Chuck, I know about these materials and how they are used. I've seen them used in boat construction. That's not the point. They're foam, albeit in "foamboard" form and I wouldn't buy a boat in which they were used in the hull, aside from the transom and perhaps way above the waterline. They're fine for decks, and for "furniture" in the cabin, though. There's no doubt foamboard makes for a lighter boat. |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:10:43 -0500, HK wrote:
The only materials I think suitable for the fiberglass "hull" are the various cloths and resins, not foam or foam boards or fillers. From the very beginning fiberglass boat builders have been using core material in strategic places to add thickness and stiffness without adding weight. Unsupported fiberglass by itself is not a particularly good structural material. Wood was probably the first core material and is still very popular. The trick is to properly protect it from moisture and rot. If you take a look at well built offshore boats like Bertram, Hatteras and Grand Banks you will find a lot of structural wood. The secret is to use high quality material and protect it well. Fiberglass combined with any type of core material is a composite. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:10:43 -0500, HK wrote: The only materials I think suitable for the fiberglass "hull" are the various cloths and resins, not foam or foam boards or fillers. From the very beginning fiberglass boat builders have been using core material in strategic places to add thickness and stiffness without adding weight. Unsupported fiberglass by itself is not a particularly good structural material. Wood was probably the first core material and is still very popular. The trick is to properly protect it from moisture and rot. If you take a look at well built offshore boats like Bertram, Hatteras and Grand Banks you will find a lot of structural wood. The secret is to use high quality material and protect it well. Fiberglass combined with any type of core material is a composite. Yeah, Hatteras is well-known for using a lot of "structural wood" in its hullsides and bottoms, right, Wayne? Jeez. Properly protected wood is just fine in stringers, bulkheads, transoms, et cetera. But that wasn't what was being discussed. Hulls were. Does that high transom, dead transmission RV of yours have wood in its hullsides or bottom? Well, hopefully if it does, it isn't balsa. |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 4, 7:30 am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote: On Nov 3, 4:29?pm, HK wrote: Just read that Albemarle was bought out by Brunswick. Another famous line goes in the crapper. Cabo was sold last year. Sad to see the independents disappearing, since they build the best boats. Where have you been, Harry? Brunswick has owned Albermarle for quite while now. Basically, they are built by the same group that makes Hatteras. Many of the upper tier trademarks built by Brunswick are pretty darn good boats. I'm sure they were better boats when the companies that built them were independent. The newest model Albemarle, for example, is wider and with less deadrise than the model it will be replacing. That's corporate conglomerate think for you...take a line of fishing boats and turn them into something less. People often think that just because something is made by small independents that it automatically means better craftmanship and quality, but that just isn't always true. Larger companies have money to use for R&D and testing, plus the tools to ensure quality control. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Boat Equipment -- Quality is Poor | Cruising | |||
Boat Quality/Opinion Sources | General | |||
Boat Quality.... | ASA | |||
Bombardier sells rec vehicle business | General | |||
Icelander Manufacturer | UK Power Boats |