Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 17, 5:53 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, wrote:



On Aug 17, 5:09 pm, hk wrote:

wrote:
On Aug 17, 4:48 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 4:32 pm, wrote:

On Aug 17, 2:43 pm, hk wrote:
RMR wrote:
This is ridiculous.. the hybrids we make no adays are every bit as
strong as wood stringer, poly boats.. You can't compare what your dad
sold in his shop made of polyester resin, and the epoxy, mahogany,
glass and bi axle made now. It's in the engineering, you can spew all
you want, but you are wrong... The Toleman's in particular are some
beefy boats that go where your Parker never will. I won't let you pull
me into this one, you need to do your homework then come back and we
will talk..
Consider you probably have never even been close to a Parker, or climbed
aboard one and looked around, I find your comment laughable.
Then your comment about a certain Tolman is equally laughable if
you've not seen it.
I've seen some stitch-and-glue dories around here, even a couple of
16-footers. I wasn't impressed.
There are small dories that are wood handbuilt that will still be
around when you're Parker is dead.
What's the biggest stitch-and-glue heavy duty boat you've built that
regularly plies the ocean?
To think that someone can't build a wood boat at least as strong as a
commercial company (who is trying to make a profit) that makes thin
F.G. boats is stupid and absurd.
I believe that empiracally and theoretically, that a joint made using
epoxy/glass/biax/epoxy saturated wood is stronger than a poly-resin
boat built with poly-glass/wood stringer construction.

Even the best production boat company cannot put as much work into a
boat as a home builder can. The home builder can afford to use the
best materials and lavish time on each joint to maximize strength and
when it is done decide to do it over whereas once the production boat
company decides its profit margin is going down, so do invisible
improvements.

I wouldn't leave the marina in the typical home built boat. I've seen
lots of 'em. I'm not saying a careful knowledgeable builder can't do a
fine job, because I have seen examples of those, too. But typically, the
homebuilts I have seen are poorly constructed out of crappy materials.

Memo to self: Cross HK offa invite list.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you know the history, he was really trolling folks like myself who
actually know a little about composite, skin on frame boats, try KF
the guy, and Genes server, and life will be a lot easier.. I love the
tolmans, I always wanted to build a Simmons Sea Skiff for "out east"
here.

It is a shame, we see people with a lifetime of experience they should
be able to pas on to others but odd personality flaws prevent them
from being able to do so. It is really odd that they often even
refuse to look at things logically; when everybody around them
complains about their behavior, they conclude that everybody else is
wrong. How likely is that? So, this lifetime of accumulated
knowledge remains locked inside their heads. A real shame.

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:43:19 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

I suspect the Tolman is stronger than most Fiberglas boats and I have
never heard of this happening so his answer is useless. *Any other
answers on how much pounding is too much?

Most good boats will take as much or more than you can, at least for a
while. It really all comes down to your sense of what is appropriate.
Usually boats that fail from pounding do so gradually over time, and
the softness becomes evident as things deteriorate. Things flex and
rattle that shouldn't be, cracks become evident, floors go soft,
stringers flex, that sort of thing.

There was a notable exception close to Marco Island last year where a
go fast boat was jumping wakes at high speed just for the thrill of
it. They jumped one too many and the boat disintegrated on contact,
killing several people.

Watching boats in chop
 

Watching boats in chop
 

Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 17, 6:25*pm, hk wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:53 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, wrote:

On Aug 17, 5:09 pm, hk wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 17, 4:48 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 4:32 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 2:43 pm, hk wrote:
RMR wrote:
This is ridiculous.. the hybrids we make no adays are every bit as
strong as wood stringer, poly boats.. You can't compare what your dad
sold in his shop made of polyester resin, and the epoxy, mahogany,
glass and bi axle made now. It's in the engineering, you can spew all
you want, but you are wrong... The Toleman's in particular are some
beefy boats that go where your Parker never will. I won't let you pull
me into this one, you need to do your homework then come back and we
will talk..
Consider you probably have never even been close to a Parker, or climbed
aboard one and looked around, I find your comment laughable.
Then your comment about a certain Tolman is equally laughable if
you've not seen it.
I've seen some stitch-and-glue dories around here, even a couple of
16-footers. I wasn't impressed.
There are small dories that are wood handbuilt that will still be
around when you're Parker is dead.
What's the biggest stitch-and-glue heavy duty boat you've built that
regularly plies the ocean?
To think that someone can't build a wood boat at least as strong as a
commercial company (who is trying to make a profit) that makes thin
F.G. boats is stupid and absurd.
I believe that empiracally and theoretically, that a joint made using
epoxy/glass/biax/epoxy saturated wood is stronger than a poly-resin
boat built with poly-glass/wood stringer construction.
Even the best production boat company cannot put as much work into a
boat as a home builder can. *The home builder can afford to use the
best materials and lavish time on each joint to maximize strength and
when it is done decide to do it over whereas once the production boat
company decides its profit margin is going down, so do invisible
improvements.
I wouldn't leave the marina in the typical home built boat. I've seen
lots of 'em. I'm not saying a careful knowledgeable builder can't do a
fine job, because I have seen examples of those, too. But typically, the
homebuilts I have seen are poorly constructed out of crappy materials.
Memo to self: *Cross HK offa invite list.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If you know the history, he was really trolling folks like myself who
actually know a little about composite, skin on frame boats, try KF
the guy, and Genes server, and life will be a lot easier.. I love the
tolmans, I always wanted to build a Simmons Sea Skiff for "out east"
here.

It is a shame, we see people with a lifetime of experience they should
be able to pas on to others but odd personality flaws prevent them
from being able to do so. *It is really odd that they often even
refuse to look at things logically; when everybody around them
complains about their behavior, they conclude that everybody else is
wrong. *How likely is that? *So, this lifetime of accumulated
knowledge remains locked inside their heads. *A real shame.

--

I'll tell you what is a shame: someone like JustWait who has never built
a large wood boat capable of ocean duty making all manner of incorrect
claims, as for example, the Tolmans are not stitch and glue, when, in
fact, the designer of said boats says they are.

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is as
strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans engine,
fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I had weighed
1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is 21' and weighs
almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't relative to strength in
boats capable of running in heavy water.

Getting back to the original question...how fast can you run a really
choppy inlet? With your lightweight boat and its nearly flat bottom, I'd
guess you could maintain planing speed...maybe.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the designer is using laymans terms when he calls it stitch and tape.
If you study the plans for a Toleman, there is one seam that is
stitched, but the boat is a skin on frame, not a stitch and tape..
Like I said Harry, twist it any way you wish.. it is what it is...

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:50:39 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.

~~ snerk~~

Plywood stringers indeed. At least they're not chip board.

Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 17, 6:33*pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 6:25*pm, hk wrote:





wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:53 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, wrote:

On Aug 17, 5:09 pm, hk wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 17, 4:48 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 4:32 pm, wrote:
On Aug 17, 2:43 pm, hk wrote:
RMR wrote:
This is ridiculous.. the hybrids we make no adays are every bit as
strong as wood stringer, poly boats.. You can't compare what your dad
sold in his shop made of polyester resin, and the epoxy, mahogany,
glass and bi axle made now. It's in the engineering, you can spew all
you want, but you are wrong... The Toleman's in particular are some
beefy boats that go where your Parker never will. I won't let you pull
me into this one, you need to do your homework then come back and we
will talk..
Consider you probably have never even been close to a Parker, or climbed
aboard one and looked around, I find your comment laughable.
Then your comment about a certain Tolman is equally laughable if
you've not seen it.
I've seen some stitch-and-glue dories around here, even a couple of
16-footers. I wasn't impressed.
There are small dories that are wood handbuilt that will still be
around when you're Parker is dead.
What's the biggest stitch-and-glue heavy duty boat you've built that
regularly plies the ocean?
To think that someone can't build a wood boat at least as strong as a
commercial company (who is trying to make a profit) that makes thin
F.G. boats is stupid and absurd.
I believe that empiracally and theoretically, that a joint made using
epoxy/glass/biax/epoxy saturated wood is stronger than a poly-resin
boat built with poly-glass/wood stringer construction.
Even the best production boat company cannot put as much work into a
boat as a home builder can. *The home builder can afford to use the
best materials and lavish time on each joint to maximize strength and
when it is done decide to do it over whereas once the production boat
company decides its profit margin is going down, so do invisible
improvements.
I wouldn't leave the marina in the typical home built boat. I've seen
lots of 'em. I'm not saying a careful knowledgeable builder can't do a
fine job, because I have seen examples of those, too. But typically, the
homebuilts I have seen are poorly constructed out of crappy materials.
Memo to self: *Cross HK offa invite list.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If you know the history, he was really trolling folks like myself who
actually know a little about composite, skin on frame boats, try KF
the guy, and Genes server, and life will be a lot easier.. I love the
tolmans, I always wanted to build a Simmons Sea Skiff for "out east"
here.

It is a shame, we see people with a lifetime of experience they should
be able to pas on to others but odd personality flaws prevent them
from being able to do so. *It is really odd that they often even
refuse to look at things logically; when everybody around them
complains about their behavior, they conclude that everybody else is
wrong. *How likely is that? *So, this lifetime of accumulated
knowledge remains locked inside their heads. *A real shame.

--

I'll tell you what is a shame: someone like JustWait who has never built
a large wood boat capable of ocean duty making all manner of incorrect
claims, as for example, the Tolmans are not stitch and glue, when, in
fact, the designer of said boats says they are.

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is as
strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans engine,
fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I had weighed
1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is 21' and weighs
almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't relative to strength in
boats capable of running in heavy water.

Getting back to the original question...how fast can you run a really
choppy inlet? With your lightweight boat and its nearly flat bottom, I'd
guess you could maintain planing speed...maybe.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

the designer is using laymans terms when he calls it stitch and tape.
If you study the plans for a Toleman, there is one seam that is
stitched, but the boat is a skin on frame, not a stitch and tape..
Like I said Harry, twist it any way you wish.. it is what it is...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And you twisted the question, a typical trait of yours. First it was
"what stitch and tape..." now it's "what ocean going.. " you are
toying around while folks are trying to get serious info, but you
obliviously don't know the difference between stitch and tape, and
composite, and skin on frame.. Three different construction methods,
three sets of engineering tricks to provide structural integerity,
although there are also several ways to hybred two or three of the
techniques, which I have done for several dozen boats, How many Epoxy
resin (not polyester) Occoume laminate, and Bi-axle boats have you
built, any size will do, and please provide either pictures, or just
spin it another way. I just can't stand to see someone passing along
so much wrong information, but I will try again to ignore you...
later..

Watching boats in chop
 

wrote in message
...

On Aug 17, 6:33 pm, wrote:


And you twisted the question, a typical trait of yours. First it was
"what stitch and tape..." now it's "what ocean going.. " you are
toying around while folks are trying to get serious info, but you
obliviously don't know the difference between stitch and tape, and
composite, and skin on frame.. Three different construction methods,
three sets of engineering tricks to provide structural integerity,
although there are also several ways to hybred two or three of the
techniques, which I have done for several dozen boats, How many Epoxy
resin (not polyester) Occoume laminate, and Bi-axle boats have you
built, any size will do, and please provide either pictures, or just
spin it another way. I just can't stand to see someone passing along
so much wrong information, but I will try again to ignore you...
later..


I am a complete dummy about working with fiberglass and resins, mainly
because my brief employment at Boston Whaler exposed my severe allergic
reaction to the stuff.

But, a few years ago, in Florida, I was talking to a guy who was involved in
litigation with his new boat manufacturer. Seems the bulkheads and other
glassed-in components were separating from the hull structure, and the boat
was basically falling apart.
This was a large boat (55+ footer).

I learned later that the hull had been built, but then sat around for some
long period of time before completing the manufacture of the rest of the
boat. The problems were apparently due to the fact that once fully cured,
the resins used to install the bulkheads, etc. did not properly bond to the
hull. I was told that the process has to be done in a timely manner to
ensure proper bonding.

I don't know, but it made sense, because other boat from the same
manufacturer did not exhibit these problems.

Eisboch

Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 17, 6:49*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Aug 17, 6:33 pm, wrote:

And you twisted the question, a typical trait of yours. First it was
"what stitch and tape..." now it's "what ocean going.. " you are
toying around while folks are trying to get serious info, but you
obliviously don't know the difference between stitch and tape, and
composite, and skin on frame.. Three different construction methods,
three sets of engineering tricks to provide structural integerity,
although there are also several ways to hybred two or three of the
techniques, which I have done for several dozen boats, How many Epoxy
resin (not polyester) Occoume laminate, and Bi-axle boats have you
built, any size will do, and please provide either pictures, or just
spin it another way. * I just can't stand to see someone passing along
so much wrong information, but I will try again to ignore you...
later..

I am a complete dummy about working with fiberglass and resins, mainly
because my brief employment at Boston Whaler exposed my severe allergic
reaction to the stuff.

But, a few years ago, in Florida, I was talking to a guy who was involved in
litigation with his new boat manufacturer. * Seems the bulkheads and other
glassed-in components were separating from the hull structure, and the boat
was basically falling apart.
This was a large boat (55+ footer).

I learned later that the hull had been built, but then sat around for some
long period of time before completing the manufacture of the rest of the
boat. *The problems were apparently due to the fact that once fully cured,
the resins used to install the bulkheads, etc. did not properly bond to the
hull. * I was told that the process has to be done in a timely manner to
ensure proper bonding.

I don't know, but it made sense, because other boat from the same
manufacturer did not exhibit these problems.

Eisboch

I would have to guess either the surfaces were not prepared properly
as you noted, or they used Polyester Resin as an anhesive as well as
for the laminations.. Polyester is for laminating, Epoxy is an
Adhesive.. They can, and in many cases can be used in conjunction, but
proper care must be taken as you must rely on a mechanical bond as you
can not mix the two and create a chemical bond. I should also note
that there are still many huge manufacturers out there that will
insist that these resins are waterproof and we have had that
discussion before but for this conv, I stipulate that they are...
"until the seal is disrupted", then they just make great barriers to
hold moisture in, which is a great way to delaminate, uh, laminates
and rot wood. Over time folks are learning to use Epoxy as an
adhesive, and to never try to "seal" frame components, paint is much
better at letting the wood breathe.. HTH..

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:25:56 -0400, hk wrote:

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is as
strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans engine,
fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I had weighed
1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is 21' and weighs
almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't relative to strength in
boats capable of running in heavy water.

Depending on the care taken by the home-builder, he could well have a
more solid boat than a factory boat.
Factory boats *are* hand-made, by factory workers.
Some of them might come in with a hangover, and the QC guy might have
one too.
Many things can wrong during the build process, and get hidden.
The home builder has the advantage of *knowing* nothing went wrong.
How spotty the manufacturing process is can be seen by reading about
Carolina Skiff problems, which I've seen in the forums.
Now, I'm not scared about buying a CS, but if I built a boat myself I
would *know* exactly what I'm getting.
Same holds true with a lot of stuff, including car mechanical work and
woodworking.
Regarding weight, I've read where major brand factory-made boats
all come out at different weights, due to different guys doing the
glass/resin/epoxy work. Sometimes it's a significant difference,
maybe 100-200 pounds on an 18'.
The CS owners were measuring the thickness of their transoms and came
out with a bunch of different measurements, varying an inch or so.
According to CS itself that was "normal" and attributed to different
workers doing the job, and maybe something about their transom board
supplier - can't remember exactly.
As far as weight/strength ratios and heavy water, it's more
complicated than you suggest, otherwise we'd all be in iron or cement
boats.
Since the Tolmans are long-time Alaskan water boats, I wouldn't worry
about their "strength."

--Vic

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:25:56 -0400, hk wrote:


It is a shame, we see people with a lifetime of experience they should
be able to pas on to others but odd personality flaws prevent them from
being able to do so. It is really odd that they often even refuse to
look at things logically; when everybody around them complains about
their behavior, they conclude that everybody else is wrong. How likely
is that? So, this lifetime of accumulated knowledge remains locked
inside their heads. A real shame.

Just so you know, Harry, two dashes followed by a space, is the delimiter
for a signature. Many/most newsreaders will cut off a signature when
replying.

Watching boats in chop
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:50:39 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.

~~ snerk~~

Plywood stringers indeed. At least they're not chip board.


Parker and Grady use the same XL ply stringer material, as do many other
manufacturers of top-quality boats. What are the stringers made of in
your floating RV?

Watching boats in chop
 

Watching boats in chop
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:25:56 -0400, hk wrote:

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is as
strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans engine,
fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I had weighed
1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is 21' and weighs
almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't relative to strength in
boats capable of running in heavy water.

Depending on the care taken by the home-builder, he could well have a
more solid boat than a factory boat.
Factory boats *are* hand-made, by factory workers.
Some of them might come in with a hangover, and the QC guy might have
one too.
Many things can wrong during the build process, and get hidden.
The home builder has the advantage of *knowing* nothing went wrong.


You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.

Watching boats in chop
 

hk wrote:
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:25:56 -0400, hk wrote:

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is
as strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans
engine, fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I
had weighed 1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is
21' and weighs almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't
relative to strength in boats capable of running in heavy water.

Depending on the care taken by the home-builder, he could well have a
more solid boat than a factory boat.
Factory boats *are* hand-made, by factory workers.
Some of them might come in with a hangover, and the QC guy might have
one too.
Many things can wrong during the build process, and get hidden.
The home builder has the advantage of *knowing* nothing went wrong.


You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.

Do you like ass play?

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:35:08 -0400, hk wrote:


You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.

It's my "impression" they usually do.
Guys who work on cars are a different story.
Beware of ads like this"
1974 Camaro $2600
Rebuilt engine and trans.
Lots of extra parts thrown in for free.

--Vic.

Watching boats in chop
 

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:52:20 -0500, Vic Smith penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:35:08 -0400, hk wrote:

You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.
It's my "impression" they usually do.
Guys who work on cars are a different story.
Beware of ads like this"
1974 Camaro $2600
Rebuilt engine and trans.
Lots of extra parts thrown in for free.

I think Harry may actually be onto something.

Homebuilders are homebuilders.... and I see a lot of homebuilt
aircraft built in the most meticulous way.... poorly. These builders
think and feel that they are building with the highest quality
possible and with the utmost attention to detail and craftsmanship.

Feeling that one knows what they are doing and really KNOWING what
they are doing may not always appear in the same place...... best
intentions notwithstanding.


I see a considerable number of "boats under construction" by amateurs
who live near the shoreline. The majority are destined to become useless
- or worse - dangerous hulks. On the other hand, I have seen some nice
"homebrew" restorations of boats worth restoring.

Watching boats in chop
 

"Don White" whited.ns.sympatico.ca wrote in message
...
hk wrote:
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:25:56 -0400, hk wrote:

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is as
strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans engine,
fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I had weighed
1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is 21' and
weighs almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't relative to
strength in boats capable of running in heavy water.

Depending on the care taken by the home-builder, he could well have a
more solid boat than a factory boat.
Factory boats *are* hand-made, by factory workers.
Some of them might come in with a hangover, and the QC guy might have
one too.
Many things can wrong during the build process, and get hidden.
The home builder has the advantage of *knowing* nothing went wrong.


You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.

Do you like ass play?


Ok now someone is posting with my name.
Can anyone trace this?

Watching boats in chop
 

Don White wrote:
"Don White" whited.ns.sympatico.ca wrote in message
...
hk wrote:
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:25:56 -0400, hk wrote:

What is also ridiculous is a home brew builder claiming his boat is as
strong as a factory built boat. What does your boat weigh, sans engine,
fuel, et cetera? Under 1000 pounds? The last 18-foot boat I had weighed
1650 pounds and was built like a tank. My current boat is 21' and
weighs almost 3000 pounds. I bet you think weight isn't relative to
strength in boats capable of running in heavy water.
Depending on the care taken by the home-builder, he could well have a
more solid boat than a factory boat.
Factory boats *are* hand-made, by factory workers.
Some of them might come in with a hangover, and the QC guy might have
one too.
Many things can wrong during the build process, and get hidden.
The home builder has the advantage of *knowing* nothing went wrong.

You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.

Do you like ass play?


Ok now someone is posting with my name.
Can anyone trace this?





Surely it is one of the seven little schitts.

Watching boats in chop
 

Nice troll. but I am not biting, everyone knows you are full of
bull....

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 22:08:04 -0400, hk wrote:

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:52:20 -0500, Vic Smith penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:35:08 -0400, hk wrote:

You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.
It's my "impression" they usually do.
Guys who work on cars are a different story.
Beware of ads like this"
1974 Camaro $2600
Rebuilt engine and trans.
Lots of extra parts thrown in for free.

I think Harry may actually be onto something.

Homebuilders are homebuilders.... and I see a lot of homebuilt
aircraft built in the most meticulous way.... poorly. These builders
think and feel that they are building with the highest quality
possible and with the utmost attention to detail and craftsmanship.

Feeling that one knows what they are doing and really KNOWING what
they are doing may not always appear in the same place...... best
intentions notwithstanding.


I see a considerable number of "boats under construction" by amateurs
who live near the shoreline. The majority are destined to become useless
- or worse - dangerous hulks. On the other hand, I have seen some nice
"homebrew" restorations of boats worth restoring.

Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 17, 2:25*pm, hk wrote:
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:29:09 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Yesterday, i was at St. Andrews State PArk near Panama City, FL siting
on the jetty watching boats going in and out between the jetties. *The
tide was going out with s little wind opposing it so there was a good
chop in the channel. *It was a great venue for watching how boats are
handled in chop.
About 1/4 of the boats were clearly going too fast for conditions and
eventually they would pound too hard and slow down. *About 1/4 were
going too slow and were wallowing in the deep chop. *What did amaze me
was the number of small boats with transoms cut away so much that if
they slowed down their own wake would swamp them. *These boats had
transom tops only inches from the water and seemed to have no business
in such chop.
My Tolman is the first power boat I have ever driven so I have no
other basis for comparison. *What degree of pounding is acceptable?

You still thinking about doing a Bahamas trip with the Tolman?
From your previous posts, I'm guessing the Tolman has been only
in the river. *Are you thinking about taking it to some chop to get a
feel on its handling?
I've given some thought to how I would test what is "safe water" if I
get a Carolina Skiff, especially since my boat handing experience is
limited. *I've got a feeling that it will happen naturally, since I
really don't want to go looking for trouble. *More that I don't want a
10 grand motor dunked in salt water than anything else.
But if you've been motoring the Tolman only in calm waters and plan to
take it to the Bahamas, maybe a little "testing" is in order.

--Vic

Indeed, he ought to get some experience on the mighty waters of Lake
Lanier.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

LMAO!!!!!!
No, Lake Erie. If he wants to test the " pounding capabilities " of
his Tolman...that'd be the place.

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:30:21 -0400, hk wrote:

Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.

~~ snerk~~

Plywood stringers indeed. At least they're not chip board.


Parker and Grady use the same XL ply stringer material, as do many other
manufacturers of top-quality boats. What are the stringers made of in
your floating RV?

Probably solid teak, everything else is.

Watching boats in chop
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:30:21 -0400, hk wrote:

Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.
~~ snerk~~

Plywood stringers indeed. At least they're not chip board.

Parker and Grady use the same XL ply stringer material, as do many other
manufacturers of top-quality boats. What are the stringers made of in
your floating RV?

Probably solid teak, everything else is.



How very special, but, then, everything about that overstuffed old
floating RV is, right?

Watching boats in chop
 

RMR wrote:
Nice troll. but I am not biting, everyone knows you are full of
bull....

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 22:08:04 -0400, hk wrote:

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:52:20 -0500, Vic Smith penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:35:08 -0400, hk wrote:

You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.
It's my "impression" they usually do.
Guys who work on cars are a different story.
Beware of ads like this"
1974 Camaro $2600
Rebuilt engine and trans.
Lots of extra parts thrown in for free.
I think Harry may actually be onto something.

Homebuilders are homebuilders.... and I see a lot of homebuilt
aircraft built in the most meticulous way.... poorly. These builders
think and feel that they are building with the highest quality
possible and with the utmost attention to detail and craftsmanship.

Feeling that one knows what they are doing and really KNOWING what
they are doing may not always appear in the same place...... best
intentions notwithstanding.

I see a considerable number of "boats under construction" by amateurs
who live near the shoreline. The majority are destined to become useless
- or worse - dangerous hulks. On the other hand, I have seen some nice
"homebrew" restorations of boats worth restoring.


Fascinating. Are you claiming that there are *not* a goodly number of
homebrew boat builders who do not know what they are doing and as a
result build builts that are useless or dangerous? Or are you claiming
there are not some homebrew boat restorations that turn out nicely?

:)

Watching boats in chop
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:21:19 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:52:20 -0500, Vic Smith penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:35:08 -0400, hk wrote:


You are assuming the home builder knows what he is doing. I would bet
against that much of the time.

It's my "impression" they usually do.
Guys who work on cars are a different story.
Beware of ads like this"
1974 Camaro $2600
Rebuilt engine and trans.
Lots of extra parts thrown in for free.

I think Harry may actually be onto something.

Homebuilders are homebuilders.... and I see a lot of homebuilt
aircraft built in the most meticulous way.... poorly. These builders
think and feel that they are building with the highest quality
possible and with the utmost attention to detail and craftsmanship.

Feeling that one knows what they are doing and really KNOWING what
they are doing may not always appear in the same place...... best
intentions notwithstanding.

I won't argue about the difference in building planes and boats, since
I've done neither. It is my impression that building a boat like the
Tolman requires mostly the ability to lay on glass/resin/epoxy
properly, some basic woodworking skills, and the desire and patience
to do it all correctly . I have no doubt I could make a sturdy and
seaworthy boat if I went at it, since many have done them and they are
being used. Probably take me 5 times longer or more than justwait.
Know absolutely nothing about homebuilt planes. I figure for every
one made a few thousand boats are made.
But I won't challenge what you say - that's for the boatbuilders to
do, and none have here.
In general I agree with you about the DIYer.
Most should have hired the job done by a pro.
I remember a few occasions when househunting where a proud owner
would show me the basement he had "finished."
The design and/or materials and/or joinery and/or esthetics would
strike me all wrong, and I'd be saying "Nice," but thinking
"Crap. Why did he do this? If I buy this house I'm going to have to
tear all this out."
OTOH, I've seen real nice jobs done by DIYer's, and factory crap.

--Vic

Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 18, 12:30*am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:30:21 -0400, hk wrote:
Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.

~~ snerk~~

Plywood stringers indeed. *At least they're not chip board.

Parker and Grady use the same XL ply stringer material, as do many other
manufacturers of top-quality boats. What are the stringers made of in
your floating RV?

Probably solid teak, everything else is.


There was a 60 some foot GB docked alongside the Yacht Club on the
River this weekend. Looked like a planked teak transom on a
fiberglass hull.

Nice looking boat.

Watching boats in chop
 

JimH wrote:
On Aug 18, 12:30 am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:30:21 -0400, hk wrote:
Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.
~~ snerk~~
Plywood stringers indeed. At least they're not chip board.
Parker and Grady use the same XL ply stringer material, as do many other
manufacturers of top-quality boats. What are the stringers made of in
your floating RV?
Probably solid teak, everything else is.


There was a 60 some foot GB docked alongside the Yacht Club on the
River this weekend. Looked like a planked teak transom on a
fiberglass hull.

Nice looking boat.


Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do
the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I
should do, by the grace of God, I will do.

— Edward Everett Hale (1822-1909)

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:


Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

After maintaining hardwoods for many years, when I see a beautifully
finished grain I think.......can I get this in a non-scratch plastic?
Yep, taste is subjective, and changing.

--Vic

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:


Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.



I guess the boys over at American Marine Ltd. never got your memo.


Eisboch

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:15:32 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:


Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

After maintaining hardwoods for many years, when I see a beautifully
finished grain I think.......can I get this in a non-scratch plastic?
Yep, taste is subjective, and changing.

That was wrong actually. I wouldn't get a wood grain in plastic.
I like "light" which might be because my eyes aren't as good as they
once were. Besides the maintenance issues, dark woods don't
lend themselves to bright atmospheres, which is my preference now.
Think formica. Or whatever.

--Vic

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:52:05 -0700 (PDT), JimH
wrote:

There was a 60 some foot GB docked alongside the Yacht Club on the
River this weekend. Looked like a planked teak transom on a
fiberglass hull.

What river is that? We live just off the Caloosahatchie in SWFL.

The teak (over fiberglass) transom is one of Grand Bank's most
recogniziable features. They look great when properly finished but
it's a lot of work to keep it up. Mine is about ready for another
re-do but we're in the middle of the rainy season here and ducking
hurricanes.

Watching boats in chop
 

On Aug 18, 5:44*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:52:05 -0700 (PDT), JimH
wrote:

There was a 60 some foot GB docked alongside the Yacht Club on the
River this weekend. * Looked like a planked teak transom on a
fiberglass hull.

What river is that? *We live just off the Caloosahatchie in SWFL.

The teak (over fiberglass) transom is one of Grand Bank's most
recogniziable features. *They look great when properly finished but
it's a lot of work to keep it up. *Mine is about ready for another
re-do but we're in the middle of the rainy season here and ducking
hurricanes.

Vermilion.

Watching boats in chop
 

Eisboch wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:

Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.


I guess the boys over at American Marine Ltd. never got your memo.


Eisboch





If someone gave me one of their barges, I would sell it in a New York
minute.

--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do
the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I
should do, by the grace of God, I will do.

— Edward Everett Hale (1822-1909)

Watching boats in chop
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:15:32 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:

Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.
After maintaining hardwoods for many years, when I see a beautifully
finished grain I think.......can I get this in a non-scratch plastic?
Yep, taste is subjective, and changing.

That was wrong actually. I wouldn't get a wood grain in plastic.
I like "light" which might be because my eyes aren't as good as they
once were. Besides the maintenance issues, dark woods don't
lend themselves to bright atmospheres, which is my preference now.
Think formica. Or whatever.

--Vic


Formica is just a plasticized coating over paper. It's certainly ok for
a kitchen, but on a boat, I'd want something not paper-backed.

--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do
the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I
should do, by the grace of God, I will do.

— Edward Everett Hale (1822-1909)

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:47:06 -0400, hk wrote:


Formica is just a plasticized coating over paper. It's certainly ok for
a kitchen, but on a boat, I'd want something not paper-backed.

Starboard then. Starboard everywhere except the bunk.
There I want a mattress.

--Vic

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:44:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:52:05 -0700 (PDT), JimH
wrote:

There was a 60 some foot GB docked alongside the Yacht Club on the
River this weekend. Looked like a planked teak transom on a
fiberglass hull.

What river is that? We live just off the Caloosahatchie in SWFL.

The teak (over fiberglass) transom is one of Grand Bank's most
recogniziable features. They look great when properly finished but
it's a lot of work to keep it up. Mine is about ready for another
re-do but we're in the middle of the rainy season here and ducking
hurricanes.

Speaking of that, you gonig to head out and tie off between a couple
of deadmen? :)

I loved that story.

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:

Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

Mahogany and teak actually look a lot alike when properly finished
with a good varnish but teak is much more durable.

Watching boats in chop
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:

Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

Mahogany and teak actually look a lot alike when properly finished
with a good varnish but teak is much more durable.


Mahogany and teak don't look the same to me. As for durability, I
wouldn't buy a new boat with any exterior wood. On the interior, I
prefer a minimum of visible wood...and as trim, not on surfaces that
would be subject to wear.

I had my fill of sanding and refinishing wood boats, including varnished
wood, when I was a young teen-ager.


--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do
the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I
should do, by the grace of God, I will do.

— Edward Everett Hale (1822-1909)

Watching boats in chop
 

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:

JimH wrote:
On Aug 18, 12:30 am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:30:21 -0400, hk wrote:
Parker's solid fir plywood stringer system continues to give
customers the strongest, toughest and safest fiberglass boats built.
~~ snerk~~
Plywood stringers indeed. At least they're not chip board.
Parker and Grady use the same XL ply stringer material, as do many other
manufacturers of top-quality boats. What are the stringers made of in
your floating RV?
Probably solid teak, everything else is.


There was a 60 some foot GB docked alongside the Yacht Club on the
River this weekend. Looked like a planked teak transom on a
fiberglass hull.

Nice looking boat.


Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

All the cruise ships seem to have three inch thick unfinished teak
weather decks. Where you go to run laps. They sand it once a year, and
hose it down occasionally. US battleships had four inch teak decks.
Also unfinished.

Casady

Watching boats in chop
 

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:02:11 -0400, hk wrote:

Which goes to show how subjective taste is. I've never liked teak on a
boat. On the exterior, I always preferred mahogany, the real stuff, not
the crap that is sold most often these days as mahogany. In a cabin, I
pretty cherry or oak.

Mahogany and teak actually look a lot alike when properly finished
with a good varnish but teak is much more durable.


Mahogany and teak don't look the same to me. As for durability, I wouldn't
buy a new boat with any exterior wood. On the interior, I prefer a minimum
of visible wood...and as trim, not on surfaces that would be subject to
wear.

I had my fill of sanding and refinishing wood boats, including varnished
wood, when I was a young teen-ager.



Different strokes............remember the Woody thread?

A lot of work but when properly maintained they are beautiful