Ferro Cement Hulls

[AuzzieM]

Originally Posted by Carouse

Our f/c hartley has been comp insured for the last 6 years with no problems at all,I havn't even been asked for a rigging survey.Our insurance is through AON Insurance

Thanks, I will call them to see if they can help me (Berthed at East Coast Marina, Manly)

[hooked on water]

Dear Auzzie

I am in the throws of trying to get mine insured, and have the first stage of survey reports ready, hopefully will look at insturance soon
they are hopeful that through the whole construction process it will be acceptable to the companies with a push
I will look at AON also
thanks coop
cheers
Hooked

[DeesSqueeze]

Not meaning to 'bump' this, but I have a couple questions about FC. Some of the newest concrete/cements are reinforced with polyurethane 'matchsticks' or similar fibers. Since many of the negative comments I've heard about FC relate to the possibility of corrosion of the chicken wire/rebar, what is the general feeling about newest cement technology helping overcome this problem?

[Alan Wheeler]

I have not heard of this. I would be cautious of deviating from the tried and true techniques. Many of the failures in FC were due to someone going outside of the main practice. It would be like taking a Resin and Glass firbre and replacing the glass fibre with some material that seems like it would be a good idea. Now it is possible it does become a good idea, like Kevlar and Carbon. But none of those materials ever wnet into a hull without testing first. While FC tends to get built and then it is found the idea wasn't a good one. The result is a bad hull that then pulls down the reputation iof the good opnes out there. So unless extensive testing has been carried out, I wouldn't entertain the idea. And when I say testing, I don't mean concrete buildings. Different technology and as different as chalk and cheese.

[skipmac]

One thing you should not forget with a ferro cement hull is resale. I can tell you as a former yacht broker that they are very tough to sell, mainly due to their reputation for problems.

From what I know about the material and opinions of others on this forum it seems like FC can produce a good boat but there have been enough botched jobs, usually homemade to scare off a lot of buyers. On the other hand, due to the difficulty in selling the boats you may find a real bargain.

Good luck

[San Juan Sailor]

I don't know much about fc boats and I'm not offering an opinion but one thing I've noticed about fc boats in the classifieds is they are almost always very inexpensive for their size. A blessing if you're buying- a curse if you're selling.
Dan

[Alan Wheeler]

I don't see that as a negative if you are buying from second hand. The points to consider are,
1: More affordable. We could never have afforded a boat our size in any other material.
2: They don't depreciate as much. FC tends to stay at the same price. Cheaper, but more stable.
3: Because you don't have such a large financial commitment tied up, the loss is also not so great if the worst should happen. For some, it is worth the risk not to pay exorbitant insurance and only carry a third party insurance. If you do manage to get insurance cover, the premium is cheaper, due to most companies charging at a rate of 1% of the value.
Negatives,
1: it is easier to over capitilize. We have fitted $40K worth of new mast and rigging, which is 30% odd of the entire value of the boat. If we decided to sell, It may make the boat more enticing to a prospective buyer, but it will most likely not increase the value much.
Fitting the same $40K of mast on a $200K boat and the capitilization difference is not so great. You may or may not get that $40K back when you sell your $200K asset.
2: This point is the biggest negative. The cost of building a boat is made up of about 10% going into Hull construction. So lets say you building a $200K project. The FC Hull will cost about 5% $10K of the project, a GRP about 10% $20K and a composite most likely above that. So you spend a total of $190K on a complete FC finished project and if you went to sell it new, it is stil only worth what that kind of FC boat is going for on the market. This is the single biggest negative and the reason why commercial building FC does not work.

[CSY Man]

[CSY Man]

The above picture is of a homemade boat, built in 1974 and struck/side-swipped a navigation marker at 4 knots in the Bamahas a few months ago. The entire Starboard side "exploded" and the boat was damaged beyond repair.
The boat was later sunk in deep water as no yard would haul it out of the water, fearing it would break up completly in the slings.

The was un-insured and had never been surveyed.

[miss-m]

Gulp. Now thats a terrfying picture!
It's pictures like that which scared people off ferro-cement. Although I cant imagine fibreglass would have been much better!
The only thing which makes me feel better is that we sideswiped our dock a few months ago at a fair old pace, and didnt even scratch the paint! Makes me glad our ferro was done by professionals.
Great pic though- thanks for posting it.

[Alan Wheeler]

Difficult to tell from the photo, but something doesn't quite look right. The steel armature looks nothing more than oversized square builders mesh and the netting looks like the wrong type as well as not much of it and all rusted away. And the cement looks like a poor ratio of cement to sand, or the wrong sand or contaminated sand. Can't easily tell, but it shoudln't have crumbled like that and the internal steel should have been better protected. Which leads me to believe that this was not built correctly. I would expect that some visible external signs should have rared their ugly heads before hand. Namely rust. It is almost impossible not to have water hydrauliocly push paint away in blisters from the hull in a case like this. And it would have weeped rust around lower area's of the hull.

[CSY Man]

Which leads me to believe that this was not built correctly. I would expect that some visible external signs should have rared their ugly heads before hand. Namely rust.

Bingo, we have a winner.

There was plenty of rust all over the boat for years, but rust-remover and white paint fixed that problem with regular intervals.

Anyway, this is the boat that was docked in my canal for 10 years.
It is now on the bottom of a very deep ocean..RIP.

[andrejsv]

Now you got me worried. I have put aside any work on the hull of my very badly maintained Ferro, until I get the engine going and replace the standing and running rigging. Then the plan is to haul it out, chip away and re-cement the bad areas.

I am thinking of using Emaco S88 CI. has any one use this product for this purpose? (I havent yet)

Thanks,

[Boracay]

The old standard cement in ferro boats was made up of fresh A grade Portland cement, clean sharp river sand and Pozzolan (volcanic fly ash).
This is what the Romans used to glue their constructions together and some of them are still good.

I have heard suggestions that some sort of new fangled compound can be used to get the new cement to bond to the old.

It is possible that some additional reinforcing rod and mesh might be needed, tied/welded into the existing structure.

[stuartcnz]

If you find one and he has a hammer that he intends on tapping the hull with, he doesn't know anything about ferro boats. Get rid of him before he gets near the boat!

Follow Alan's advice about where it sits on it's waterline.

If the hull looks fair, it was probably plastered by someone who knew what they were doing (good).

Look for rust stains (not good). Look for bulges, particularly around the keel area, could be exploding ballast (not good, can be repaired, but is major).

Has it been painted recently? better if not, as it could be hiding rust stains.

Jump up and down on the deck. Might not tell you anything, except that you won't fall through the deck, but might be fun .