Re: What is your opinion of Bavaria's?
Originally Posted by JonEisberg
Again, you're right about that, but I still don't like the practice, and I've seen it elsewhere, in some very surprising applications...
For example, you'll rarely find a boat built to a much higher standard than Cherubini does... Yet, I was stunned to see U-bolts instead of chainplates for the main and mizzen shrouds on the 44 shown at Annapolis a few years ago... And, yes, the lowers were, too, ever so slightly misaligned... (grin)
Chainplates can be a tricky thing to get right on any rig other than one with inline shrouds... On boats with fore and aft lowers, there is almost always some degree of misalignment to the load, for to get it just so usually requires the chainplate bulkhead to be slightly angled, or the chainplate itself either bent, or twisted... Few builders bother to go to such lengths, even the Valiant 42 I took south last fall, the chainplates for the lowers were absolutely vertical and ran athwhartships, and relied on the insertion of a toggle to improve the modest degree of misalignment...
"Good enough" perhaps, but still, not "Done Right"... (grin)
The lower shrouds on my Col. 43 are essentially U-bolts - they are a stub of stainless strap welded to a large stainless plate which acts as a big backing plate - the stub passes through the deck like a conventional chainplate. All the uppers are conventional long straps bolted to bulkheads etc. It has kept a 66' stick standing for 42 years despite years of serious neglect and the boat has sailed from N.Y. to San Francisco so I guess it's adequate.
I've never, to the best of my knowledge, seen a chainplate perfectly aligned with the shroud attached to it - that's the reason for toggles.
I, myself, personally intend to continue being outspoken and opinionated, intolerant of all fanatics, fools and ignoramuses, deeply suspicious of all those who have "found the answer" and on my bad days, downright rude.