Cheoy Lee Offshore 40 - Page 2 - SailNet Community
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #11 of 30 Old 04-28-2010
Senior Member
 
sailortjk1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Porter, IN
Posts: 4,647
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed1v View Post
either your photo is a very old one, or your dreaming. i worked in hong kong back in 1971 and visited the yard often. had a cadet back then. later, in 1986 back in u.s. we cut up an old cl-40 after it was gutted by fire. the decks were solid glass with channels filled with continuous solid teak. no end grain balsa anywhere. not even sure back then it was used by any asian yard. yes, ply was used as embedded backing plates for high load area.
Welcome aboard Reed.
Nice way to start your first two post here, a lot like steeping on board with your left foot. Is it not possible to state your side of the story or your experience with the boat with out insulting another member? I'm just saying...

Courtney is My Hero

If a man is to be obsessed by something, I suppose a boat is as good as anything, perhaps a bit better than most - E.B. White
sailortjk1 is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 30 Old 04-28-2010
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: southport, me
Posts: 27
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
 
nope

no. i am old and real tired of misinformation people disseminate out there about boats. especially when a bunch of young folks think they know what happened before they were born. and someone claiming to work with charlie W. well that is interesting since charlie is dead for almost twenty years and stopped working about 20 years before that. the other issue is that cheoy lee shipyard is a contract operation. they built to specs back then. now the richards and perry stuff may be nothing but plywood with some glass thrown on them, but the luders and the old offshores were a whole different breed. back in the 60s most of the sailboats were sold to navy officers(us and brits)who could really tailor what went into their boats: thick or thin teak, lead or iron ballast, american or brit stainless fittings, etc. the only ply was either backing or bulkheads. and back then the hulls were laid up in one piece, not glued together. the chainplate attachments were fiberglass extention of the hulls. no one can afford to make boats today that way. if you do some history about the "queens birthday" storm down in the straits between nz and aus, the luders clipper did real well while boats like the hans christian simply sank out of sight. but i suppose your right, i should be more diplomatic when erroneous information is so often offered up on the internet. btw: lizzie meyer was curious why someone would call her j boat "full keeled" using whats-his-name definition. likewise a westsail would be called a fin keeled. not sure the 50% definition makes much sense. us oldtimers made the distinction between a keel that was simply an extention of the hull verses something that was added to the hull(elem of y. design). ie full keel being a structural component of the hull rather than being attached to it. but guess the new age of "define it as you may" rules.
reed1v is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #13 of 30 Old 04-28-2010
Telstar 28
 
sailingdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 43,290
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Rep Power: 14
         
Nice, now you're calling Jeff_H a liar...


Quote:
Originally Posted by reed1v View Post
no. i am old and real tired of misinformation people disseminate out there about boats. especially when a bunch of young folks think they know what happened before they were born. and someone claiming to work with charlie W. well that is interesting since charlie is dead for almost twenty years and stopped working about 20 years before that. the other issue is that cheoy lee shipyard is a contract operation. they built to specs back then. now the richards and perry stuff may be nothing but plywood with some glass thrown on them, but the luders and the old offshores were a whole different breed. back in the 60s most of the sailboats were sold to navy officers(us and brits)who could really tailor what went into their boats: thick or thin teak, lead or iron ballast, american or brit stainless fittings, etc. the only ply was either backing or bulkheads. and back then the hulls were laid up in one piece, not glued together. the chainplate attachments were fiberglass extention of the hulls. no one can afford to make boats today that way. if you do some history about the "queens birthday" storm down in the straits between nz and aus, the luders clipper did real well while boats like the hans christian simply sank out of sight. but i suppose your right, i should be more diplomatic when erroneous information is so often offered up on the internet. btw: lizzie meyer was curious why someone would call her j boat "full keeled" using whats-his-name definition. likewise a westsail would be called a fin keeled. not sure the 50% definition makes much sense. us oldtimers made the distinction between a keel that was simply an extention of the hull verses something that was added to the hull(elem of y. design). ie full keel being a structural component of the hull rather than being attached to it. but guess the new age of "define it as you may" rules.

Sailingdog

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Telstar 28
New England

You know what the first rule of sailing is? ...Love. You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but you take
a boat to the sea you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of the worlds. Love keeps
her going when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurting 'fore she keens. Makes her a home.

—Cpt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity (edited)

If you're new to the Sailnet Forums... please read this
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

Still—DON'T READ THAT POST AGAIN.
sailingdog is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #14 of 30 Old 04-28-2010
Moderator
 
Jeff_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,963
Thanks: 5
Thanked 164 Times in 133 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
Reed: For whatever reason you seem to have a bone to pick with me that is assuming that by "young folks" you mean me. I will accept that part of your comments as the most accurate portion of your diatribe since mentally I still feel like a young folk. But to set the record straight, I started sailing in 1961 and have owned and sailed boats nealy continuously since. I started designing boats in the mid-1960's.

I worked for Charlie Wittholz in the early 1980's. At that time Charlie had several projects going for Cheoy Lee. You are mistaken if you think that Charlie retired 40 years ago. Charlie continued to work until the day he died, which was in the early 1990's. There is public record of my involvement with Charlie that can be found in published drawings that I drafted during the period that I worked with Charlie. Amoungst the other projects that I worked on for Charlie, I did a number of Charlie's presentation drawings which were reproduced in Yachting Magazine, and Woodenboat, and all of these drawings have my name lettered either parrallel to the bottom of the keel (the canoe yawl in WoodenBoat Issue 56 page 130) and on other drawings in the pocheting of the bootstripe.

I am not precisely certain where you were going when you say that the hulls were laid up in one piece, but I would agree that the huills of most of the designs that Cheoy Lee built in the 1960's were molded in one piece. The decks and houses were built separately. Having replaced a rotten deck carlin on 1960's Cheoy Lee Bermuda 30 assure you that the carlin was wood, and the sub-deck was plywood and that the hull to deck joint was a glass in-turned flange with a wooden clamp/shelf to which the deck frames were attached and to which the plywood sub-deck was attached. This matched the construction that I observed on a trunk cabin version of the Frisco Flyer, and on the Robb Lion.

You are not the first person to object to the definition of a fin keel that I refered to and which was in use when I was a kid. Frankly, I see this as a semantics issue that has little bearing on the behavior of the boat in question.

But to discuss this in a bit more detail, since you mentioned Elements of Yacht Design, I do not know which version of Skene's you are referring to, but you would be hard pressed to find any definition of a fin keel within Skene's Elements of Yacht Design at least I couldn't find a definition in the four editions in my collection.

The definition of a fin keel as a keel whose bottom was 50% of its LOA was in popular use on the US east coast in the 1960's when I began sailing and that definition seemed to be was used in marketing literature for boats with short-waterlines, cut away forefeet and sharply raked rudder posts during that era.

In fairness to the dicussion, other people have asked me to document that definition in the past and the only published sources that I have seen within my collection for this definition were pre-WWII books on yacht design and sailing, an early article by Marchaj, and a 1960's era intro to yacht design in Skipper magazine.

I do think that you may be reading my definition backwards of the way it was written. By the definition that I grew up with, I would say that Liz Meyer's J-Boat is a fin keel with an attached rudder and a Westsail is the quintessential full keel, as were my 1939 Stadel Cutter and 1949 Folkboat.

While I am not sure that this matters to this discussion, I am not really comfortable with your definition of a full keel i.e. "a full keel being a structural component of the hull rather than being attached to it." The problem with that definition is that a Cal 40 would be considered as having a full keel. I am reasonably certain that neither of us would consider a Cal 40 to have a full keel.

But more to the point of this thread, semantics aside, no matter what you chose to call it, a boat whose waterline is 3/4's of its LOD and whose keel has a forefoot that is cut away another 10-15% and whose rudder post rakes so that the bottom of the keel ends up being less than 50% of its LOA, that boat will not track as well as boat which has a reasonable length waterline, and a full-length keel. And if you hang the rudder on the aft end of that keel, course corrections will be more difficult to make. And unlike a full keel, that boat will not stand on its keel without falling forward. And if the bottom of the rudder is within a few inches of the bottom of the keel then it is more prone to damage in a grounding than a full length keel or a properly designed fin keel which typically has a rudder that is significantly shallower than its keel for that reason. And that was my point above when I say that these boats have neither the merits of a full length keel or a fin keel, but generally have the liabilities of both.

Respectfully,
Jeff


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay

Last edited by Jeff_H; 04-28-2010 at 02:54 PM.
Jeff_H is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #15 of 30 Old 04-29-2010
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: southport, me
Posts: 27
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
 
hum???

my only beef with you is in regards to the luders (clipper and luder 36 sloop) and the old offshore 40(reliant design). the other cheoy lees may or may not be constructed out of compressed cardboard. i personally would never buy a richards or a perry model of anything. did not know charlie died with his boots on. more power to him. thought his major design efforts in fiberglass were in the 50-70s.
to sum up: you can not judge a boatyard that produces contract work in a cavalier manner. the 60s were times of cheap teak and mahog. compressed wood products were more expensive back then. plus there was not the mass boat market as existed in the 70s-90s. you tended to get real quality boats that do not seem to be produced today(boatpox anyone). plus the hong kong yard had the pick of the best craftsmen since the end of ww2 resulted in lots of workers looking for work(in asia). by the mid 70s things had changed dramatically in the hk area and in the boat market in the us.
as far as your keel definition goes, i have heard the definition before. that only begged the question as to how one defines "keel". the rhodes keel starts its run downwards not quite forward of the first shroud and runs right back to the mizzen. now do you measure the keel from its initial turn from the interior hull space(floors) or do you measure it in terms of its foot?

but i do need to apologize to you about one thing: sorry, i should not have referred to skene's eoyd. i meant chapelle's yacht design and planning book.
his definition as such is where the rudder is placed abaft from the keel. he aludes to using the 1/4 definition but is not firm about it. so much for memory loss.
reed1v is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #16 of 30 Old 04-29-2010
Moderator
 
Jeff_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,963
Thanks: 5
Thanked 164 Times in 133 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
It sounds like we are more in agreement than not, which I suggest probably works well for both of us.

On the keel terminology, I would agree with you that it would be hard to define the precise point at which the keel bottom begin. That was why I originally chose to describe these as "approaching being fin keelers with attached rudders" rather than as true fin keel.

The discussion about the deck construction yesterday got my curiosity up and so I did a little research. There is a great website that is dedicated to Rhodes Reliants and Offshore 40's.

Included on that website is a maintenance manual prepared by a fellow who has owned a Reliant since new. http://astro.temple.edu/~bstavis/rr/handbook1.doc

Within that manual is a discussion of the deck construction on the Reliant. (see below) While somewhat different than the smaller Cheoy Lees that I knew well, it is in general consistent with what I would have expected for an Asian boat with teak decks from that era in terms of having the teak set in a setting bed, and screwed into place over fiberglass sheathing over a wooden core. I would think that the Luan planking (as compared to the plywood found on smaller Cheoy Lees) would be more prone to having rot move more rapidly along its length, but not as rapidly across the plank.

I also found it interesting that on the Rhodes Reliant, (unlike the smaller Cheoy Lees that I knew) the cabin sides were a comparatively thin teak veneer (inside and out) screwed and glued to a fiberglass cabin side. Live and learn.

Jeff

"Decks


Probably the biggest single project in our thirty-year maintenance cycle is deck restoration. The teak decking was essentially a surface treatment over a very strong and complete fiberglass cored structure. The underlying fiberglass deck was molded to a fine finish; indeed, when we bought the boat, the "standard" boat came with the fiberglass decks and the teak overlay was an optional extra (that most people ordered).


The top fiberglass deck is about 3/8" thick. Then there is a core. Rhodes specifications were for 1/2" end grain balsa, but on my boat and I think others, lauan planks were used for the core, roughly 9/16" x 3 1/2" planked fore and aft. The lauan may be a bit heavier than the specified balsa, but, at least on my boat, it did not rot and deteriorate when it got wet. There is plywood under the winch pads. (Some boats may have other materials in the core. My guess is that there is more variability in the Offshore 40 than in the Reliant.) Below the wood core is another layer of fiberglass, roughly 1/8" thick.


The teak was about 3/8" thick, machine screwed (wood screws on some boats) to the fiberglass. David Toombs said that some boats bought 1/2" decking at extra cost, and at least one (SHIBUI) originally had decks ordered extra thick (3/4"), so its decks can be expected to last longer. Certainly on the standard 3/8" deck, there was not much wood between the top of the screws and the surface of the deck, and we all learned that teak decks wear down, faster if cleaned often and vigorously, until the plugs are thin and fall out. We have gone through the challenge of making thinner and thinner plugs (I have made shavings 1/32" and epoxied them on) or trying other techniques to cover the screws.

It may have been the intent that the machine screws would not penetrate through the fiberglass deck, so that leaks would not reach the wood core; I doubt, however, that construction was perfectly uniform in this regard. The teak was bedded to the fiberglass in thiokol (same as the seams), and over time this adhesive seal failed. Ultimately it was possible for water to penetrate through the teak, either between the seams in the teak decking or near deck hardware and chainplates. The water could migrate around under the teak, find its way through some screw holes that hold the teak down, and reach the wooden core. Water in the core froze in winter, expanding and delaminating the core structure and affecting the core and creating more waterways. When TAKE FIVE was about 10 years old, Nick Litchfield was able to cure deck leaks by drilling the teak, screwing in zerc fittings, and pumping Dolphinite under the deck. Whether this approach might extend the life of 30 year old decks, I do not know.

It is possible that the wear and tear on the teak decks is affected by climate. Probably if the boat is left exposed to the elements and if there is frequent rain, the teak will not dry out and will stay tight. If, however, the boat is hauled out and is wintered in a dry, heated shed, the teak will dry out somewhat and pull at the seam compound. Probably baking under a winter cover in the summer heat does similar things. According to this analysis, the Puget Sound boats will probably need deck restoration.

Last. Of 49 boats for which I have data, 28 have undergone deck restoration. On 18 boats, teak was put down again on the fiberglass deck, and 10 finished the original or a new fiberglass deck (although some have teak on the bridge deck or a few other places). Of the 21 still with original decks, at least 4 need deck restoration soon."


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay

Last edited by Jeff_H; 09-24-2010 at 12:21 PM.
Jeff_H is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #17 of 30 Old 04-29-2010
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 116
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
My Offshore 33 deck is cored with Teak. No, really. It is. I think they used scraps of teak they had laying around the yard. The nice thing is it will never rot. The bad thing is it can delaminate due to the oily nature of teak and its dislike of sticking to polyester.

The teak deck was very thin when the boat was new, and has only gotten thinner. Most of the bungs have fallen out - but for whatever reason the core isn't wet and the decks are solid. No substitute for luck.

Best Regards,

e

.::.
eolon is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #18 of 30 Old 04-29-2010
Telstar 28
 
sailingdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 43,290
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Rep Power: 14
         
Not sure why you think teak core will never rot???

Quote:
Originally Posted by eolon View Post
My Offshore 33 deck is cored with Teak. No, really. It is. I think they used scraps of teak they had laying around the yard. The nice thing is it will never rot. The bad thing is it can delaminate due to the oily nature of teak and its dislike of sticking to polyester.

The teak deck was very thin when the boat was new, and has only gotten thinner. Most of the bungs have fallen out - but for whatever reason the core isn't wet and the decks are solid. No substitute for luck.

Best Regards,

e

.::.

Sailingdog

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Telstar 28
New England

You know what the first rule of sailing is? ...Love. You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but you take
a boat to the sea you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of the worlds. Love keeps
her going when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurting 'fore she keens. Makes her a home.

—Cpt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity (edited)

If you're new to the Sailnet Forums... please read this
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

Still—DON'T READ THAT POST AGAIN.
sailingdog is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #19 of 30 Old 04-29-2010
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 116
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
Compared to balsa, teak won't rot.

heh


Best Regards,


e

.::.
eolon is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #20 of 30 Old 04-29-2010
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 116
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
btw, if you really wanted a core that won't rot you would use european larch. The foundations of the city of Venice were built of larch logs, and they have survived being under seawater for 800 years.

Best Regards,


e

.::.
eolon is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bluewater defined? dch Learning to Sail 44 07-29-2009 07:20 PM
what determines a coastal cruiser??? troyaux Boat Review and Purchase Forum 18 02-14-2007 11:39 PM
Reflections of an Offshore Passage Bermuda Seamanship & Navigation 4 07-23-2006 08:03 PM
Cheoy Lee ballast/displacement ratio garyp Boat Review and Purchase Forum 9 03-23-2004 10:48 PM
JeffH - Question on cutters el General Discussion (sailing related) 6 09-05-2003 06:50 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome