Production Boats Fit For Blue Water

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Okay - this is what's hilarious to me about these kinds of debates. We see example after example after example of production boats out there plying very blue water all over the world. People having an absolute blast.

And, instead of talking about the real joy these people are getting out of it all and digging into how they did it - most guys here are obsessing over a broken sea-cock, socio-economic-political organization, and legalese.

THAT is as funny as it is sad.

So, to you whose sailing lives revolve around such minutiae, I say enjoy your seacocks, federations, and contractual language. It's admirable.

To everyone else, I say - doesn't this look awesome!?!!?!?!





THIS is what this thread is about.

You are the one that is silly for making such a big deal about the CE class A rating suggesting it was somehow proving how well the boats were built!
Look we all want you to be successful in your upcoming cruising here in the Caribbean with your boys so chill out and instead of debating silly stuff start learning things that will keep you and the boys safe and having great times.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

So, Polux was essentially right.

Here's what Polux said (highlighted for Smack):

I could but I don't want. I am feed up with you asking about confirmation regarding what I say. You should know UK is not properly EC, I mean they are in but they have a foot in other out and may probably go out as a result of a referendum they plan to make. Contrary to other EC countries they also don't need boat licences to sail so that goes with liberty package that some other European countries see as irresponsibility.

Here's what Weavis said in relevant part (and avb3 confirmed) (again highlighted for Smack):

Britain is a fully vested member with a few sovereign exceptions on membership. They are not in the fiscal community as per the EURO for one. Britain also retained the right to refuse compliance with rules that conflicted with Heritage and some British traditions.

Also, EVERY member country has the right to run referendums for the general populace to see if they want to retain membership or not.

There is no such thing as "not properly EC", you are either in or out. There are joining "stages" for new members, which are to equalise rules etc, but you are "IN" when you start, just some things dont apply to you at that time until you are fully vested.

Britain has been in from the near the beginning of the EC.

Is it that point in the thread when you're shifting your tactics to more word games?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

You are the one that is silly for making such a big deal about the CE class A rating suggesting it was somehow proving how well the boats were built!

Yet again, please put up my quote where I said "CE class A rating proves how well the boats are built".

Here is what I said in my original post:

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Modern Category A "Production Boats" - also referred to in forums as "BeneHunterLinas" and "Bleach Bottles" and other interesting names - are built for and perfectly suited to bluewater cruising. Period.

Now - there is a lot of debatable minutiae in there, and a lot of subjective viewpoints surrounding it, which is why the debate has continued way past its "sell by" date - but that's fact. "Production Boats" are NOT just "coastal cruisers" as some would have us believe. There's far too much evidence out there to debunk these kinds of claims.

I don't mind debating with you Robert. But you need to be factual. Otherwise it's a waste of time.

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Look we all want you to be successful in your upcoming cruising here in the Caribbean with your boys so chill out and instead of debating silly stuff start learning things that will keep you and the boys safe and having great times.

Thank you. I appreciate that. I am learning tons - from very good sailors on this and other forums - in my marina - in my off-shore races, etc. And those people have no problem being straight up. So it's all good. I only argue with the ones I think are wrong. There aren't that many of them.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Exile

Here's what Polux said (highlighted for Smack):

UK is not properly EC, I mean they are in but they have a foot in other out

Here's what Weavis said in relevant part (and avb3 confirmed) (again highlighted for Smack):

Britain is a fully vested member with a few sovereign exceptions on membership.

Is it that point in the thread when you're shifting your tactics to more word games?

No word games required. Separate currency, sovereign exceptions on membership, etc.

Legal language is all about wording. My point is, Polux is not "as wrong" in his statement as Weavis said he was. There is definitely gray area.

But enough of civics...where are you sailing next?

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

So, as one who wants to be prudent, should I believe you, or Keno, or the CE rating?

The photo Kenomac showed was of a corroded BRASS fitting:

Maybe a few more pictures will convince some to replace their DZR brass fittings. You know.... those brass fittings which are A-OK with the certification process. Here's one I have personal knowledge of. See how the corrosion takes place from within the elbow. The connector coupling is what failed and has broken off. No evidence of any corrosion issue was ever seen from the outside and the same boat was surveyed only 12 months prior to the fitting failure. There's basically nothing left of the elbow to hose coupling. The elbow and through hull showed no signs of dezincification. The boat had spend only 6 years in the water when the failure took place.

Robert's subsequent reference to a fitting that should last the life of a boat was a BRONZE fitting:

Originally Posted by robert sailor
What actually most bronze fittings will last a lifetime so while some people may choose to replaced them that is just a personal decision, you should know that now that you have plans to do some cruising. If you had a boat with brass fittings then it would be very prudent to replace them every 5 years.

Are you intentionally trying to mislead or, as I suspect (again & again), just have no idea what the bronze vs. brass thru-hull discussion is really about?

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Oh, I've been convinced of that since day one. The thread keeps going because others are not so convinced that production boats are safe off-shore. So you might want to ask them.

Look when you started your thread the first thing I posted was how small production boats had sailed around the world and how it really depended on the skill set of the sailor but you didn't want to hear that because it wasn't the agenda that you had cooked up. Yes everyone on this forum knows that. You have a distaste for what you call blue water boats(others call them higher quality) the only advantage they might have is in storm force winds and seas and being able to last longer(they tend to age better) but they do cost more. Its no different than fine automobiles, they cost you more and give you a little more enjoyment when you use them but ultimately they are still just transportation. Cruising is a great leveller on the social side, no one cares what you did in your past life nor what you sail. People sailing a clapped out Alberg are just as welcome in the get togethers as a couple in a brand new Oyster. Yes there will always be people that do not like the modern boats because they know they were built to a price and they worry about the quality when they read about ones breaking up at sea. You and I know those are generally odd cases but we also know these new entry level boats are indeed built down to a price but by and large they get the job done for many thousands of sailors and the seas are full of them so just like my original examples of small boats that have sailed around the world these boats will do the job.
There are folks that don't like the modern boats and they have their own agenda be it heavy displacement double enders or some of the classic cruisers and no amount of putdowns will change their mind. That's the beauty of sailing, its just like people, they like to be different. Your threads are the MacDonald's of threads..on that level you are successful but I hope there is a side to you that actually enjoys learning as much as you enjoy pushing peoples buttons.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Can you please post the quote where I said "a fender washer being a 'Fuse' for a deck cleat"? I think you'll have a good deal of trouble finding it.

I'm not volunteering to do the digging, but I would suggest for you to do it if you think something needs correcting. No yard guys to hire for this one. Otherwise you run the risk of it becoming accepted as fact in people's minds. You know, like all those bluewater boat owners who say such awful things about Hunters & Bene's, or the guys rescued in the Island Packet who you had implied had only ventured out in the storm because they were on a bluewater boat, or how its better to use fender washers vs. backing plates, or all the "repairs" an Oyster has to endure when undergoing a bottom prep, etc., etc., etc.

As I recall, your deck cleat "tutorial" attempted to justify a mfg. using washers instead of more expensive backing plates with your "fit-for-purpose" theme. In other words, a deck cleat shouldn't be designed so strong as to hold a boat up out of the water, the danger being the surrounding laminate could be ripped out along with the cleat, thereby exacerbating the damage. Did I get it right? You predictably got a lot of push-back on that one, including from a couple of our favorite yard guys. As memory serves, somebody likened your "advice" to the washers acting like a "fuse," i.e. allowing the cleat to give way before the surrounding laminate was also destroyed. That's the whole idea of a fuse, right? Destroy itself so greater damage is avoided? The funny thing about your trying to back away from it now is that I vaguely recall your approving the "fuse" analogy with one of your signature "Bingo's" or "Exactly's," etc. Might be wrong on that last one, but there's no denying how you tried to defend the use of fender washers to secure cleats on the deck of a boat on the grounds that it's better for the cleat to fly out (and maybe kill someone as Minaret recounted) than for the surrounding laminate to be damaged and a larger hole to open up. Your not explicitly using the word "fuse" is right up there with Bill Clinton's asking to define what the word "is" is, but I'm sure that's what your response to this will be.

Too bad Neil couldn't come up with any glassed-in backing plates on that Bene, huh?

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

No word games required. Separate currency, sovereign exceptions on membership, etc.

Legal language is all about wording. My point is, Polux is not "as wrong" in his statement as Weavis said he was. There is definitely gray area.

Of course there is, and your vast legal experience has just demonstrated that.

[weavis]

To finish this subject completely, as there is doubt and defence of the indefensible, I urge you, no I implore you to check each statement for yourself, although I am sure that interest has waned.

EVERY country in the EU has the same ability to stand away from total compliance with all the rules. The EU made provision for individual sovereignty of each member country. It is part of membership to have that condition. Many countries, in fact all of them have taken advantage of it in respect to their nations history and customs in some shape or form.

Britain is no different and totally COMPLIANT with centralised EU policy and that is why a referendum is being held. The nation is losing its United Kingdom individuality because of that compliance and there is a movement within the country to exit because of it.

The United Kingdom is a fully vested and compliant member of the EU.

To help those that wish to continue semantics, I enclose the requirements for joining. There are also several thousand other exclusions and inclusions that are pertinent to individual countries and still allow for full membership, of which I had to wade through hundreds of them to find specific reference to the subjects I was representing for my medical requirements.

For the record and for full disclosure, I have been involved in legislative working groups within the EU union since 1989 regarding some medical issues for compliance and unity. I lay claim only to a working knowledge of the system and not detailed specifics of certain countries, but I would be fairly certain that my knowledge would be more accurate that most. But then, I would not voice an opinion without quoting the sources, and more to the point, I would probably point the enquirer to the correct department to get the accurate answer required.

EU - Enlargement - Conditions for membership - European Commission

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Look when you started your thread the first thing I posted was how small production boats had sailed around the world and how it really depended on the skill set of the sailor but you didn't want to hear that because it wasn't the agenda that you had cooked up.

This is what you posted on the first page:

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Catalina 27's have sailed around the world, Cal 25's have sailed around the world, Contessa 26's have sailed around the world, Lapworth 24's have sailed around the world, Moore 24 is on its way. Some Russian guy even sailed a bath tub across an ocean. Now a days people row open boats across oceans. The list goes on and on so its not much of a leap of faith to believe "any" production boat can sail around the world if these little buggers can make it. Crossing an ocean is even easier of course which is your bench mark. Its really much more about the sailor than the boat.

I still wouldn't personally recommend that anyone take a Catalina 27 or a bathtub around the world. Maybe some will think that's a good idea from your listing them - but I hold to what I said in the first post of this thread...it's much, much better to go for a newer Cat A Production Boat.

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Yes everyone on this forum knows that. You have a distaste for what you call blue water boats(others call them higher quality) the only advantage they might have is in storm force winds and seas and being able to last longer(they tend to age better) but they do cost more.

That's not true at all. I don't have a dislike for blue water boats. I love them. I love pretty much ALL boats. I just wouldn't buy one for myself. I much prefer modern performance and value.

I don't think you'll find where I've ever "bashed" a "blue water" boat. I've pointed out issues to balance issues pointed out about "production boats" - but I've certainly never "bashed" a Moody, or an Oyster, or a Hinckley, or a Bristol - or any other boat.

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Yes there will always be people that do not like the modern boats because they know they were built to a price and they worry about the quality when they read about ones breaking up at sea. You and I know those are generally odd cases but we also know these new entry level boats are indeed built down to a price but by and large they get the job done for many thousands of sailors and the seas are full of them so just like my original examples of small boats that have sailed around the world these boats will do the job.

There are folks that don't like the modern boats and they have their own agenda be it heavy displacement double enders or some of the classic cruisers and no amount of putdowns will change their mind. That's the beauty of sailing, its just like people, they like to be different. Your threads are the MacDonald's of threads..on that level you are successful but I hope there is a side to you that actually enjoys learning as much as you enjoy pushing peoples buttons.

Though I agree with you on most of the above, I still can't get with you saying that C27s and bathtubs or plywood boats, etc. - are advisable. But I am truly glad to see that you too can celebrate the impressive success of modern production boats along with the rest of us.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by weavis

EVERY country in the EU has the same ability to stand away from total compliance with all the rules.

Thanks Weavis. That's exactly the way I understood it. You can "still have a foot out".

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by boatman61

[B]CE marking is a self-certification scheme.

not for boats its not.

[goboatingnow]

EVERY country in the EU has the same ability to stand away from total compliance with all the rules. The EU made provision for individual sovereignty of each member country. It is part of membership to have that condition. Many countries, in fact all of them have taken advantage of it in respect to their nations history and customs in some shape or form.

No it does not, unless it arranged that derogation when it joined the EU, or it was subsequently received all EU agreement to implement an agreed derogation subsequently. it cannot arbitrarily agree derogations

You are mixing up your understanding of directives and regulations

and finally national law is subservient to EU law.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Thanks Weavis. That's exactly the way I understood it. You can "still have a foot out".

no you can't, Ive explained how it works

The Uk is a full member of the EU, its has specific derogations that it agreed with the full unanimity of other EU members for specific things

but in no way is that a " foot out"

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by colemj

I doubt that is a DZR brass, as well as Kenomac's example, and I think some of the posters here are confusing DZR with other brass types.

Anything DZR should have "DZR" cast right into it. If the parts being shown in pictures do not have this, it is not DZR.

Among other high end stuff, DZR is used in Blakes seacocks and specified by Lloyds.

Mark

You're wrong period. The example pictured on my post is most definitely DZR brass. I held the thing in my own hand and saw the markings on the casting myself. Too bad I didn't save the piece of crap so that I could send it to you, in order for you to see it for yourself.