|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|06-23-2005 03:22 PM|
If you are moving it to Chicago this weekend, you did buy the boat and for the money, I think you got a great deal - rumor has it you paid less for it than they gave me on a trade.
No real cautions - I had the boat up and working well. The anchor is NOT attached to the anchor line coming out of the howse pipe on deck. Something to look at before going to Chicago.
Your cruising range under power is short - about 60 -75 miles. The tank is tilted wrong and does not get all the gas out. For long trips I would carry 6 gallons on the stern ladder and fill the tank at around 60 miles. I guess that is a caution.
Also, look through the stuff on the Atomic 4. It is a good engine. Put Marvel Mystery Oil into the gas - somewhere the amount is in all the literature or go to Moyer Marine web site forum and ask them. It was fully tuned late last year with a new coil. The impeller looked real good to me this year so I left it in, but there is a brand new one in the loose parts I gave to Bill M.
I was ready to take that boat up to the North Channel for the summer - in fact I was leaving 7/1 - so it should be good to go,
|06-14-2005 07:02 PM|
Irwin32, I think i''m looking at your irwin 32 as a first time boat owner... you seem very positive on how it treated you. Any cautions for me as i consider purchasing it?
|06-12-2005 08:41 AM|
Who said this BB was dead? What!
|06-09-2005 01:03 PM|
First of all, I apologize if my original comment struck you as insulting. That was never my intent.
On the other hand I simply do not see where you are coming from you say that the original post was insulting. I went back and reread it and, at least as I read it, nowhere does it insinuate that you did not know enough to check the obvious such as electronics, etc. What it said is that when dealing with older boats, there are a range of items that have a limited practical lifespan and that those items should be considered in figuring the price of the boat. The preamble to that list indicated that if these items are in good shape, maintained, or have been replaced, then they are less relevant. I left it to you to draw your own conclusion about the condition of these items and how relevant they were.
Other than that, I do want to point out that fresh water is more of a problem with teak decks than salt water. The iodine in saltwater acts as a mild rot inhibitor. Also the fact that fresh water freezes at a higher temperature means that the sealants are exposed to more frequent freeze thaw cycles which is harder on sealants.
In the end you do not need to prove to us whether you got a good deal or not. As long as you are happy, that is all that really counts. In the end, after you have owned the boat as long as you want, and used her as you see fit, and then resold her, only then will you have a sense of how good deal you actually got. And even then, probably only you will be able to say whether you got a good deal or not since none of us will be able to evaluate whether the cost of owning the boat was equal to the enjoyment that she gave you.
|06-09-2005 04:48 AM|
Trueblue Yes there is the exception of teak on solid glass ,that is why I kept harping about cored decks because 99.9% are cored.I should of figured that making a blanket statement that effects 99.9% of this type of construction is not good enough,I always overlook the loopholes.I did think that I was referring to cored decks and probably anyone else reading it as well.This statement was part of my whole rant and was not meant to be extracted and taken out of context.BTW I happen to love Nauticats as they are one of my favourite boats for the type of sailing I do.These other manufactures try and dazzle the public showing decks like these but like I have said before their quality is only skin deep and leads to the problems of this type of constuction with their cored decks.Oh by the way I wasn`t totally honest saying Nauticat was one of my favourite boats ,it IS my favourite boat builder.I hope you are enjoying that beast and don`t make me use a lawyer the next time I post.LOL
|06-09-2005 04:17 AM|
Agreed that screwing teak planking over cored decks is a serious liability. However, teak is the best non-skid surface for decks and adds a unique aesthetic character to a quality-built boat. Many boatowners (including myself) take great pride in their teak decks and if maintained properly, will last well over 30 years. This means not applying oils or finishes which break down the polysulfide caulking, but simply rinsing with sea water and cleaning across the grain.
Before buying my Nauticat, I found very few (if any other) builders, secure teak to a solid glass substrate. Nauticats have planked teak decks, screwed & bunged to a SOLID fiberglass deck. This is an exception to your blanket statement re: teak decking only belongs on wooden boats. There is no coring anywhere on these boats, therefore, the screws do not pose the problems inherent with teak overlaid on cored decks.
Best regards, Steve
|06-08-2005 05:12 PM|
If you are still up for some opinions I will throw mine in about teak decks on a fiberglass boat.They should never be there to begin with as water, no matter how well looked after,will get through.Teak decks belong on wooden boats,perforating a core deck makes no sense,except that it looks pretty untill it is torn up with half the boat to be repaired.It is construction of that nature that makes people feel like it is quality that they are looking at and not poor boat building.If these things were epoxied in I could see it(but still luke warm) ,but the ones I have seen were all screwed in.Anyone worth anything knows you do not drill holes in the cored material boatbuilding 101,and not just a couple of holes but hundreds and just not in a small area but all over the boat.Freshwater or salt doesn`t mean beans when your talking about water intrusion.Many surveyors will miss this problem.All in all it`s bad construction period.
|06-08-2005 04:13 PM|
First, after an evening of celebration, my initial post was indeed a bit aggressive for which I apologize, as it set the tone for this thread (it has been fun, though. A little fireworks keeps a forum alive).
I did find your response to be a bit insulting as it insinuated I did not know enough to check the obvious - such as working electronics, rotted chain plates, etc. I have been around boats a long time and I can discern quality. This boat is not a Valiant, but it is a well built boat. I am not claiming the depth of knowledge you have, but I am no beginner.
As a salt water sailor, you may not appreciate how long things, like standing rigging, will last on a fresh water boat. I went to Palmer Johnson to replace some standing rigging on my Irwin just because it was 20 years old. They thought I was nuts. I am sure you will agree that PJ was a very reputable builder and maintainer of yachts. Non racing rig failures on the Great Lakes are very rare, despite numerous squalls with winds of 40+ knots.
My deck core is balsa. I agree with you that teak decks - especially ones that overlay a glass deck - are a source of concern. I always swore that I would not ever own a boat with teak decks, but much of the other strengths of this boat made me decide to go ahead anyways. This included discussions with several owners of teak decks that are around 20 years old. Again, fresh water makes a big difference.
I realize it means constant vigilance and maintenace. I retire tomorrow, so I will have the time.
Actually, all this broo ha ha made me go out and do some additional research. I am satisfied. I will never be able to afford a Valiant or a Hans Christianson. At this time in my life 50k is it.
My surveyor has seen a Nassua 40 and was not impressed and went into my survey with a negative attitude. He is not the kind of guy to say "I was wrong", but he really did like this boat''s quality and condition. He did my Irwin 12 years ago, and while his survey did not reflect his personal feeling for the boat, his conversation with me was highly critical of Irwin quality. In many ways I agree with him, despite the fact the boat has served me very well for 12 years, and I do like the boat.
I think I got a boat built well enough (my surveyor agrees) to make the trip to Bermuda and with all the extras I need to cruise comfortably. Where can one find that, ready to go now, for 50k?
Add to that I don''t have to hang around all summer trying to sell my old boat. It is a good example of an Irwin 32 with good sails (brand new jib). I am guessing it will be listed around 20K, but considering the comments I made earlier in this thread regarding a trade in, I am content. I would hope the boat yard make some money on this deal. There may be a time when I will be back to do business -this is my second purchase from them. If they don''t get something out of the deal they won''t be around the next time I am looking for a new boat. I think the deal I made was fair - not a steal. I think this boat is an excellent fit for me at this time. Not my first choice - but I can''t afford my first choice.
|06-08-2005 04:15 AM|
Maybe I am mistaken but your original post sounded like you were looking for opinions on your purchase rather than an unqualified congratulations on your purchase. I am really baffeled by the vociferous nature of your replies. Not having seen the boat I was careful to preceed my comments with the qualiication with this statement:
"As a very broad generality, unless very well maintained and updated by a previous owner, you might expect to need to address some combination of the following items:"
Given this qualifier and the qualifiers at the end of my post, I would say that all of the items on my list are valid, even if they each item does not apply specifically to the boat in question. In other words I did not say that the list of conditions potentially present on a 20 year old boat definitely existed on your specific boat.
My comments were not intended to accuse you of being undiscerning as much as it was talking about some of the things that would normally be considered in evaluating the purchase price of a boat of that age and linage. Your comments that you had evaluated the condition of the new mainsail and the electronics were entirely consistent with my comments rather than at odds with them, so I am baffled by your tone which seemed to reflect hurt feelings thatI might suggest that these items should be considered.
That said I am specifically concerned with your comments:
"I have eyes and I am able to discern things like worn out decks, rotten bulkheads, failed tabbings, worn out rigging."
"As for mast step etc, what do you think a surveyor is for?"
With regards to the items on the first list of items, deck problems are not easily detected, even by a knowledgable surveyor. Teak decks as installed on most Taiwanese boats are fastened with thousands of fastenings that penetrate the plywood decks below. The domestic plywoods used in most Asian built boats was a fairly rot and delamination prone material. Freeze/thaw in cold-freshwater climates and UV degradation in tropical areas are hard on the sealants used to protect the deck eventually allowingw water to reach these fastenings. Because teak decks often fail from below, having ''eyes'' tells you little about the remaining lifespan of the deck. The typical method of evaluating the condition of a teak deck is by sounding them out like you would a fiberglass deck only with less reliable results. In other words even if the decks look good and sound out reasonably well the normal lifespan before a major rebuild is something on the order of 25 or so year.
The way most high quality boats are built today, the areas where bulkheads usually begin to rot, and tabbing usually begins to fail, is concealed by finished materials such as cabinetry, decks and trim. Since few surveyors will do destructive testing, and so are unwilling to disassemble a boat enough to see these areas even with good eyes these items are often hard if not impossible to detect.
Standing rigging at or near the ends of its useful (and I emphasize useful) lifespan is not something that can necessarily be visually inspected. Certainly the rigging can be examined for failed terminals and for broken strands, which are the more obvious teletale signs of the end of the lifespan for standing rigging. But standing rigging often fails from fatigue. While anecdotally individual examples of standing rigging may have reportedly survived in use for 30-40 years, if you are going to count on the reliability of your standing rigging through a wide range the wind conditions, then the generally accepted recommendation is to replace standing rigging after 20 or less years of use, no matter how good the rigging looks. This is especially true of the domestically grown varieties of stainless steel rigging typically used on Asian boats.
Mast steps on many Asian boats contain portions of the support system that consist of glassed in wooden components. Over time these elements will often deteriorate. In some cases the failure mode is a slow crushing, which a good surveryor should be able to detect. But in other cases, such as a Tayana that an owner asked me about a few years back, the owner reported that the ''rig suddenly went slack'' and when investigated the glass covering on the mast step support had given way and the wooden block below that covering was found to be completely rotted out.
You did not talk about the condition of the potentially 20 year old Yanmar and the level of dilligence in its maintenance and use.
My overall point here and in my original post is that it is not relevant whether a bad mast step or any other specific problem with any of these so-called "useful lifespan" items is detected by the surveyor. These items all have a fixed life before attention is necessary. Even if these items appear perfect, after twenty years of normal use, they are suspect and as such they affect the fair market value of the boat. Not having seen the boat, or having heard about its history, use and sailing venue, it is hard to say how by how much.
In any event, my post was not intended to impune your discernment, or the quality of your surveyor. Your original post sounded like you had a question about how good a deal you had gotten on the Nassau and my post was solely intended to provide some information that might assist in allowing you to answer that question for yourself. I appologize if my reply was taken as a personal attack. It was not meant in that manner.
|06-07-2005 08:27 PM|
I admit to being a little aggressive with my original post and for this I apologize. I did indeed ask for a tough response and I got it. Challenging the opinion of the so called "more knowledgeable members" is part of the fun of debate. I do not mean disrespect to Sim or Jeff - they indeed know their stuff. But they are not the ultimate sailing gods whose opinion must be accepted or one should move to a new forum. They can be wrong - they can be biased (like boat design is not a biased issue).
Sorry dman. I am not the kind of guy who just falls in line and is afraid to challenge "accepted thinking"
To me, this is what makes a forum worth coming back to.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|