It amazes me that they do this.

[feetup]

It would be so nice to own a boat that was built with a "cost is no object" mentality. The high tech AC or open 60's/70's and such seem to ignore cost, but they pay so much attention to weight that they walk the fine line of failure or success based on the "win or fail" mentality.
For someone buying an older boat like the Cal 2 29 in the related post, money is obviously an object, and I would dare say the same for most of the folks on this forum.
I maintain though that the single biggest issue facing most manufacturers is the cost of labour, hence any issue that requires a lot of skilled labor that is not visible and that will not impress the prospective purchaser is simply not done.
This is the place where the re builder of an older boat can excel. They can study to find the proper techniques, and spend the time it takes to do such things right.
Sailingdog is right, if it failed, it would seem foolish to repair it using the same faulty techniques that caused it to fail in the first place. The question remains however, how does the average schmo judge what is the better way to rebuild a failed part?
I suppose that is what owners, and do it yourself forums are all about. This one too to a certain extent.
I think that this is where those that know should temper their impatience with the seemingly inane questions, asked in earnest, and be as descriptive as possible when answering such questions.

Feetup

[Idiens]

Originally Posted by sailingdog

A good example is in one of the recent threads where a hull support in the bilge rusted away because it was made of stainless steel. Why would you want a large chunk of stainless steel in your bilge?

IMHO, it would make far more sense to replace that chunk of stainless with a fiberglass laminate that will not be affected by the water that often is found in the bilge. Also, a steel piece up against the hull, like this piece was, will cause two hard edges that the fiberglass laminate will flex and fatigue against—where a properly installed and designed laminate support will not.

In my case, the 18 keel studs need tightening down very hard. GRP would be crushed under the washers, so SS backing plates are fitted to spread the load to the GRP. That's one extreme, the other is like X-Yachts, which I believe have an entire inverse arch structure in SS that takes the downward compression on the mast across to the cap shroud mounting each side, so the hull can be lighter.

[sailingdog]

Unfortunately, many of the "cost is no object" boats are essentially one-shot semi-disposable race boats... and not designed for comfort or longevity.

Two friends of mine are re-building a CD 30, from a storm salvaged boat, and have gutted the boat down to a bare hull and are re-building the boat from the hull up... However, they have the experience and the skills to do a proper job of it... Of course, they're neglecting their CD 25 ATM, being focussed on their new project.

[feetup]

Sailingdog;
At least your friends won't have to question the value of any parts or structures. I think that was my biggest pain throughout rebuilding, deciding if I could make things good that I felt were less than they should be, or tear it out and start again.
There were parts that I decided to restore when, in retrospect it would have been a lot better to have started from scratch. Sure, the repair is good and I have no worry about it's integrity but it probably weighs 50% more than if I had started again and done it the way it should have been done in the first place.
I guess that is the tightrope one walks unless one is starting from a bare hull.
At least with the CD 30 there aren't any structural issues with the basic hull.

Feetup

[sailingdog]

In this case there were a few basic structural issues with the hull, since it had two relatively big holes in it.

Originally Posted by feetup

Sailingdog;
At least your friends won't have to question the value of any parts or structures. I think that was my biggest pain throughout rebuilding, deciding if I could make things good that I felt were less than they should be, or tear it out and start again.
There were parts that I decided to restore when, in retrospect it would have been a lot better to have started from scratch. Sure, the repair is good and I have no worry about it's integrity but it probably weighs 50% more than if I had started again and done it the way it should have been done in the first place.
I guess that is the tightrope one walks unless one is starting from a bare hull.
At least with the CD 30 there aren't any structural issues with the basic hull.

Feetup