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

[BenthosCritter]

Originally Posted by sailingdog

I wouldn't use aluminum in the bilge, as it is far too vulnerable to galvanic issues if the bilge is wet at all.

I have an aluminum boat that I have been operating for over twenty years where the bilge always has some water in it. Its where aluminum comes in contact with stainless steel where the problems develop. In my personal experience aluminum itself is not a problem concerning water in a bilge.

I would consult with a naval architect or the expert at a good boat yard who deals in these matters.

[sailingdog]

Aluminum is not a problem until other, more noble, metals get dropped into the bilge. One boat I know of that nearly sank did so because some one had dropped a small coin, a penny or dime from the size of the hole, into the bilge while working on the boat. It had an aluminum hull and the coin basically ate its way through the aluminum. The coin had probably sat in the bilge for a year or two, but it did a suprisingly good job of eating away the aluminum.

[negrini]

Hummm, I've done some work based on Naval engineers suggestion, and assure you these guys are really serious. Things are not that simple, and don't believe people are prone to risk their business for profit, considering the liability. There is alway a compromise among project, profit, and benefit (Who will remember the 2 kills on Bavarias ?) What is most common are people wanting the 20 years old solution, 'd last forever. And would agree to re-design it using best practices and new materials, but with technology experts advice ....

[TomandKarens34]

Feetup and Sailingdog both make valid points. Would that all boats were built to "Bristol" standards! Each boat is built with a use in mind. To suggest that a coastal cruser should be rebuilt to blue water standards is silly. Repairs should be considered in more than one context. Safety should not be compromised, but does it necessarily follow that thru hulls on the head sink drain need be bronze, not plastic? I agree that its a worthy thought, and it takes only a few minutes,, to radius the corners of a backing plate on a mooring cleat. If, however, it is a mooring cleat on a 16 foot sailboat moored on a quiet lake with 3/8 nylon line, perhaps its overkill. If I have a 20 year old boat and a part has failed, and I plan on owning the boat 4 more years, I rebuild it the same way. The repair will probably last longer than the boat and 16 years beyond when I sell it. If I know a better way, a more expensive labor intensive way to do this repair, am I short changing my boat? Another example, my friend Giu, who suggested I rebuild my salon with hi-tec foam board with a wood veneer, to save weight... Giu is, simply, the smartest man I have ever met. His enthusiasm for his boat tends to skew his perspective on repairs though. I figure I would save about 260lb. It would take me 6 months extra work. On an 11500 lb. 1979 Irwin Citation 34. We're not even going to talk about the Money. I think we need to keep the people we're talking to in mind. There are some who can second guess designers on things like glassing bulkheads, but they are few and far between. I would hate to be the one telling a newbie who wants to "stiffen up" his boat, that adding glass is a good idea. To give advise, we must keep time, money, application, original intent, original design, and the skill of the repairing individual in mind. I love that "proof by violent waveing of the arms".