Refitting - Better than Factory

[ncarter]

The changes should be done to improve the vessel...only. If in doubt, consult a naval architect. It has been my experience that wooden hulls flex, but a glass hull should not move.

Originally Posted by Tony B

Question:
Is there a point at which an owner can overmodify to the detrement of a boat. I know most boats are made to flex and the tabbing in of bulkheads is usually engineered into the design. Can an owner, through lack of design knowledge, actually weaken the boat by inadvertantly moving the stress points?

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by Tony B

Question:
Is there a point at which an owner can overmodify to the detrement of a boat. I know most boats are made to flex and the tabbing in of bulkheads is usually engineered into the design. Can an owner, through lack of design knowledge, actually weaken the boat by inadvertantly moving the stress points?

i think an owner can definitely de-improve the boat. However, I dont believe most designers have a large focus on stress points etc. Sure, they do at the main bulkhead for the rigging. They try to keep all the boats as stiff as they can with the materials at hand. Compromises on bulkhead placement etc are made due to interior design requirements. Having talked extensively with 3 marine architects, and hired two for projects, that's just my feeling anyway. Boats twist and bend, but I dont really think most are designed to, just no way around it. Cheap boats that dont tab the bulkheads, but provide captive "slots" in the cabin pan to hold then in place, may be an exception... or they may say "it's meant to flex", to justify the cheap/quick building criteria. Boat design seems to be a lot of experience/gut feel backed up by calculations compromised by too many variables.....

[Danosimp3]

About half way through my restoration, i purchased a book titled "Elements of Boat Strenght" what the author called "scantlings". Basically, there are some formulas that can be worked and one can arrive at the rule of thumb for hull thickness from deck to keel, number of bulkheads and thickness, interval, strings, bedding thickness. I addressed shortages on the Reinell by meeting the recomendations in the book. I added a bulk head, tabbed all bulkheads to the hull, doubled the thickness of the chainplate beds, beefed up the stringers, and made sure the core lamintes were as thick as recomended by the formula. In most cases, the boat was at or close to specs. Two major exceptions were the chainplate beds, interior core skin thickness, and bulkheads. After all that work I began to wonder, how much did this help to improve this not very well liked boat...

As to why I decided to pur $8000 into a Reinell; one i bit off more than i could chew interms of what work i thought she needed, i continued to look for things that were deficient, the practical experience I've got from this was worth at least half of what i have invested. I never planned on turning a profit. But I do plan to refit my way into a 40' boat in the near future.

Thanks for your thoughts, stories, and opinions.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Tony B

Question:
Is there a point at which an owner can overmodify to the detrement of a boat. I know most boats are made to flex and the tabbing in of bulkheads is usually engineered into the design. Can an owner, through lack of design knowledge, actually weaken the boat by inadvertantly moving the stress points?

I think certainly possible for a well intentioned owner to make a boat worse by actually weakening a boat by creating stress points and loadings in places never intended by the designer. and / or by simply overbuilding "enhancements". As with much else in life, good intentions only get you so far - and, as they say, the road to hell is also paved with 'em .

I must confess am not terribly convinced by the flexible boat thing being any more than a (to my mind unfortunate) side effect of design compromises and choices made elsewhere. Mostly (IMO) around cost and the target market - esp. the intended lifespan. To be fair, anyone who does build a boat designed to last 50 years (plus) would go broke in short order - and those that stuck with that idea have already.....

.......the market always gets what the market wants - whether the result is as intended or is a good thing being seperate matters.

Anyway, in regard to OP I think that it is possible to make a boat better than factory - whether it makes sense to do that is debateable (probably usually not), especially given that with some boats "factory fresh" never equated to quality (nor had any intended longevity) in the first place.....as they say, can't turn a sows ear into a silk purse .

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by Danosimp3

About half way through my restoration, i purchased a book titled "Elements of Boat Strenght" what the author called "scantlings". Basically, there are some formulas that can be worked and one can arrive at the rule of thumb for hull thickness from deck to keel, number of bulkheads and thickness, interval, strings, bedding thickness. I addressed shortages on the Reinell by meeting the recomendations in the book. I added a bulk head, tabbed all bulkheads to the hull, doubled the thickness of the chainplate beds, beefed up the stringers, and made sure the core lamintes were as thick as recomended by the formula. In most cases, the boat was at or close to specs. Two major exceptions were the chainplate beds, interior core skin thickness, and bulkheads. After all that work I began to wonder, how much did this help to improve this not very well liked boat...

As to why I decided to pur $8000 into a Reinell; one i bit off more than i could chew interms of what work i thought she needed, i continued to look for things that were deficient, the practical experience I've got from this was worth at least half of what i have invested. I never planned on turning a profit. But I do plan to refit my way into a 40' boat in the near future.

Thanks for your thoughts, stories, and opinions.

You certainly aren't the only one to put more into a boat than it's worth! The bigger the boat, often the bigger the "mistake"! Dont ask how I know!

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

You certainly aren't the only one to put more into a boat than it's worth! The bigger the boat, often the bigger the "mistake"! Dont ask how I know!

A truer thing was never said. Anyone who does a labor of love like a proper boat restoration looking at it as an investment is making a mistake. Don't feel bad, my last boat was a work of art I had put 100k into and I happily sold it for 20k just to move on and up in the present market. Boats are a losing proposition financially for most in so many ways, that's why they require so much commitment for those of us who aren't stinking rich. Can't imagine how much I'd lose if I ever have to sell my present boat, it doesn't bear thinking about...

[CharlieCobra]

The only way I can come close to justifying any of this is if the owner plans on keeping the boat and they consider the cost to build one new.

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by westsail42

I think it more accurate to say

"If you want it done the way you want it, you've gotta do it yourself"

Originally Posted by CharlieCobra

The only way I can come close to justifying any of this is if the owner plans on keeping the boat and they consider the cost to build one new.

Originally Posted by minaret

Anyone who does a labor of love like a proper boat restoration looking at it as an investment is making a mistake............

Boats are a losing proposition financially for most in so many ways, that's why they require so much commitment for those of us who aren't stinking rich...............

I think this says it all...............

[barnakiel]

It can be done with any new or nearly new boat. But why should one do it?

If you think you know better than pros, then why not build your own custom?

b.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by CharlieCobra

The only way I can come close to justifying any of this is if the owner plans on keeping the boat and they consider the cost to build one new.

When you consider cost to build custom new, a restoration can start to make sense. Insured replacement value of our boat is 1.4 million, but we only have 400k into it. I doubt you actually could build it new for 1.4.

[rtbates]

Sure, depending on the builder...

For some builders it would real hard NOT to do it better...

[CharlieCobra]

Originally Posted by minaret

When you consider cost to build custom new, a restoration can start to make sense. Insured replacement value of our boat is 1.4 million, but we only have 400k into it. I doubt you actually could build it new for 1.4.

That sounds right. The owner of the SC-50 we are wrapping up just spent 65K on a boat with a max value of maybe 150K. You probably couldn't get the boat built for a mil and a half these days so for him, it was a good investment. Excuse me, now an SC-52....

[minaret]

Originally Posted by CharlieCobra

That sounds right. The owner of the SC-50 we are wrapping up just spent 65K on a boat with a max value of maybe 150K. You probably couldn't get the boat built for a mil and a half these days so for him, it was a good investment. Excuse me, now an SC-52....

That reminds me-some time ago we were talking about extending SC50's and I think Joss came up in conversation. She's in my marina now, I think. Would this be the boat in question?

[sailronin]

If I remember correctly, Joss is a modified Big Mac (Mcgregor 65) not a SC 50.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by sailronin

If I remember correctly, Joss is a modified Big Mac (Mcgregor 65) not a SC 50.

Yeah, it sure would take a lot of mods to a SC50 to make it look like THAT!

I think sailronin (Hi Dave) has it pegged!

Cheers,

Jim