High Tech vs traditional-Comments? - Page 3 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > General Interest Forums > General Discussion (sailing related)
 Not a Member? 


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 04-26-2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 114
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 14
Pangaea is on a distinguished road
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

It would''nt have to be just a Hunter. I could name at least ten.
Although I like to hear both sides of the story... I still don''t buy it. I''m not even close to buying it.


Dennis
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #22  
Old 04-26-2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 104
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 13
aasault is on a distinguished road
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

Hey Snicklefritz,

I believe you stumbled on a great spectator sport. The Sailboat Demolition Derby. I saw redneck/NASCAR types doing it with old school buses on TV, why not derelict old sailboats? Count me in.....


Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #23  
Old 04-26-2002
Jeff_H's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,445
Thanks: 3
Thanked 64 Times in 47 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

I am saying that here in Annapolis a few years back a 4100 lb Laser 28 and an Alberg 30 bounced off each other (topsides to topsides) in a thunderstorm and it was the Alberg that suffered the stress cracks and damaged hull/deck joint. Of course that is a too small a sampling for a fair example.

But if you consider your Hunter example, there is nothing especially thin about a Hunter as compared to a Alberg of equal length. If you compare an Alberg 35 at 12500 lbs to a Hunter 35.5 at 13,000 lbs of which the Alberg also has 500 lbs more ballast and a heavier rig, that suggests that the Hunter''s hull is actually heavier. And if you consider the Hunter''s framing system and higher density laminates, what ever else you can say about Hunters, I would suspect that the Hunter would do quite well relative to the Alberg in a similar impact.

Jeff
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #24  
Old 05-04-2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 138
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 13
obiec is on a distinguished road
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

It dose seam that the boat produced today are of a much heavier lay up than those produced just say 8 years ago. I could be wrong on this, But it seams that a 95 Hunter or Catalina was not a very good heavy whether boat. How ever it seams that the ones today are incredible. All you have to have are deep pockets. Is it possible that the up tern in the economy has allowed the population as a whole to afford better boats and the manufactures can now sell a much nicer boat. And the population that can now afford it is Evan demanding it. This makes me think that 10 years from now I might be able to afford a very well built 2000 boat, that will sail for many years to come.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #25  
Old 05-04-2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 275
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
windship has a little shameless behaviour in the past
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

obiec,
Why do you say these boats are incredible heavy weather boats?

Dennis
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #26  
Old 05-05-2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 138
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 13
obiec is on a distinguished road
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

As I stated I don''t know, I was more thinking out loud with a question to those whom might have a good response. This is why I was thinking that they might be good heavier whether boats. First of all It seams that there displacement has gone up quite a bit, and I am relating this back to being thicker glass better bulk heads and a generally stiffer frame. So I think they are going to flex a lot less? Secant with so many having roller furling as well as roller mains it is going to be very easy to select the right sail combo. Third It seams to me that there rigging is heavier also. And last the open sterns with the swim steps to me seams grate if you are knocked down or pooped there could be no better way to drain that cockpit that quickly. It dose seam like you would get your feet wet a little more often in following seas.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #27  
Old 05-05-2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 275
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
windship has a little shameless behaviour in the past
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

obiec,
Yeah...cool. I was just wondering. Thanx for the reply.

Dennis
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #28  
Old 05-06-2002
Jeff_H's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,445
Thanks: 3
Thanked 64 Times in 47 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about
High Tech vs traditional-Comments?

obiec

While I am not sure that I disagree with your conclusions, I do disagree with your reasoning why the newer Hunters might be better seaboats. If you look at 40 to 41 foot Hunters for example from the mid 1980''s (Legend 40), mid 1990''s (Passage 405) and today (410), you will see that the 410 is indeed about 1600 lbs heavier than the mid-1980''s Legend 40 but is virtually the same weight as the mid 1990''s Passage 405. The mid-1980''s Legend 40 also had 500 lbs more ballast and so was more like 2100 lbs lighter when the keel is subtracted. But when you look at the details, the 410 and 405 have substanially larger tankage (fuel, water and holding) they carry an extra battery bank and an larger engine. Newer boats tend to be designed to have a lot more small built in items ,as well as, alot more heavy stuff on board. Cumulatively items such as, inverters, bigger and an increased number of battery banks, heavier and duplicate ground tackle, multiple bow rollers, electric windlasses, arches, rigid vangs, corian counter tops,innerspring matresses, standard (vs optional) refrigeration, bigger engines and larger capacity alternators, larger capacity hot water heaters and such popular options as watermakers and built in auxilary gensets, really can add a lot of weight to a boat that has nothing to do with the boat''s actual strength.

When you add to that the fact that displacement on boats was generally cited as completely stripped out in the 1980''s and cruising boat weights today typically are typically cited as with a reasonable compliment of gear, I don''t think that we can assume that the hulls are heavier or have more bulkheads.

Roller fuling mainsails are fine for coastal cruising but are a really bad idea for offshore work. (They have a lousy record of jambing at the worst times and also over time when reefed, they tend to power up as the sail cloth creeps down toward the gooseneck. One thing that I applaud about Hunter (unlike Beneteau and Catalina) is that they have tried to direct potential buyers away from in-mast furling.

Then there is the heavier rigging. From my experience, I am not sure that is really true, but even if it is, newer Hunters are designed without backstays. This enormously increases the loadings on the upper shrouds as they now bear the brunt of maintaining headstay tension and aft loadings. They could easily have two or three times the loadings that they previously had to withstand and so would need to get significantly larger.

Which only leaves the open stern and given that the lip of the companionway is below the height of the cockpit seats, you really need to have an open transom to prevent downflooding.

Jeff
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #29  
Old 06-18-2006
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MS Gulf Coast
Posts: 711
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 0
seabreeze_97 is on a distinguished road
"When you look at early fiberglass boats you typically find substanially weaker laminate and much more widely spaced framing (or no framing at all). This combination would lead to fatigue issues which further weaken the laminate."

Here we go again. Jeff H., you have stated on another thread that the rumor of why the early fiberglass boats were built so thick (because the engineers under-estimated the strength of fiberglass) was false, and that they did know exactly how strong it was. Are you now saying that they over-estimated the strength of fiberglass and should've framed and braced more heavily? The reason they had little or no framing is because they didn't need it. That's why fiberglass boats took the boating world by storm when they were introduced. They didn't need all the space-consuming framing support, thus, it made for much roomier boats within the designs of the time. Cabins interiors could be built right up against the hull.

"Over the years I have seen or heard of a fairly large number of these older boats going to the landfill. While many of these boats died of economic rather than structural problems, there has been a significant reduction in the number of older boats out there."

Sorta like old cars, and most of them aren't made of fiberglass. Hmmm.
Any boat, regardless of hull composition eventually faces extensive refit or scrapping. Most people, in this disposable world, opt for something new.

Kevlar (for example) reinforced hulls can be thinner than fiberglass hulls for a given strength requirement, but, as with most things these days, the boats are built to certain limits of strength, where older products tend to have excess strength to deal with situations outside what some engineer thinks might happen. It's not that they planned to have all that excess strength, it is just one of the more pleasant side effects of the construction methods of the time. Cost constraints play a bigger factor today, causing those strength margins to be cut even closer. Overbuilt is the term most often associated with older boats, where newer things, all too often, are just good enough for the averages.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #30  
Old 06-18-2006
sailingdog's Avatar
Telstar 28
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 43,291
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Rep Power: 13
sailingdog is just really nice sailingdog is just really nice sailingdog is just really nice sailingdog is just really nice sailingdog is just really nice
Some of the newer GRP boats are built ridiculously light, some are built reasonably heavy, with proper respect to design constraints and laminate thicknesses.

Older boats often didn't use stringers, as the heavier layup was stiff enough to not require their use. The lighter laminates used by some modern designs often requires the use of stringers or framing to make the hull stiff enough to be safe. However, the laminate itself is often not thick enough to really be safe, even though the engineering analysis of it says that it has enough strength.

Dave Gerr, in his book The Nature of Boats,
has a great example, where a boat manufacturer talks about how stiff and strong a laminate being used is and demonstrates by hitting it with a hammer, which bounces off. A naval architect takes the hammer and reverses it and easily drives the claws through the laminate.

There are good boats, both old and new, and there are bad boats of all ages. A badly designed boat, even using the newest, high-tech materials and techniques, is still not going to be seaworthy or durable. Some of the older designs were made without the full understanding of the material limitations—and may have more resin and chopped strand mat than would make a durable, strong boat.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Windward performance deseely General Discussion (sailing related) 21 04-01-2012 02:42 PM
Ketch/Yawl Handling svsymphony Seamanship & Navigation 19 07-05-2008 01:19 AM
da versus high tech sailon2win Racing 5 10-05-2004 04:07 AM
High Tech on the High Seas Epiphany General Discussion (sailing related) 3 01-25-2004 02:32 PM
Genoa - high tech or traditional? buchner General Discussion (sailing related) 2 03-03-2002 04:18 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:11 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012