From: jfh@cs.brown.edu (John F. Hughes)
Subject: Types of boats...
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 16:23:26 GMT


Well, here's some fuel for a flamefest. I had to go to Ann Arbor on Thurs, so I
left early with hopes of visiting the Gougeon Bros. boatworks. That didn't work
out as planned, but I *did* get to see them at the "Metro Beach Boat Show,"
which was kinda fun. I also got to look at a bunch of boats, long before the
crowd arrived (no boat ever had more than one other person on it). 

After the first few minutes, I began doing a simple "first check" on each boat:
how was the boat set up for bow, stern, and anchor lines? This meant looking 
at the cleat installation, the kinds of chocks, and the orientation of the
cleat relative to the load applied. Why this? Because it was so easy to check,
and it's one of those things that costs little more to do right than to do 
wrong. On the other hand, done wrong it can risk your boat (anchor lines chafe
through!), and can certainly annoy you endlessly. 
   The results of my little survey were not pretty. 
   Let me mention the other questions I asked, along with the general "look" of
the boat and its construction. (1) If I got tossed around in a sea, would I
break anything I fell against? (2) How's the engine access? (3) Where do you
stow the sails (skip this one for powerboats) (4) How thick is the icebox
insulation? (5) What would happen if a deck fitting began leaking?

Make no mistake: I was looking with a cost-no-object attitude. There are things
that one does to reduce price, and these are reasonable compromises. Then there
are the things that are just stupid. Everyone loses.

Beneteau 310: The bow chocks were rectangular holes cut in toerail track. I
believe that they had small rollers, but a 1" line would chafe to death in an
hour in any sort of waves... 7 x 19 wire backstay, attached on stbd transom,
led up over a block and back to port transom, where it is adjustable. The
fittings on the transom are attached to a horizontal surface (the "swim step,"
I guess), so that the fasteners, which appear to be three #12 or #14 screws
(perhaps bolts---I could not get at the bottoms of them!) acting in tension,
which is the wrong way for a screw/bolt to be used. The companionway slide
was dark acrylic, held in place by two 6' long teak strips above it; each of
these strips was held in place by a total of 7 screws. I didn't like it, but
it's not critical. Belowdecks was very "euro". I might have broken something
tossing around. Didn't check iccebox or engine.

Beneteau 440: (Observed from dock) A long extension to the cockpit leads 
to the companion hatch, just begging for any seas that come aboard to pour down
below. Jeez!

Jeanneau: The bow chocks were made from 1/4" stainless wire. They essentially
looked like two inverted U-bolts, mounted athwartships, with a bar (mounted
fore and aft) connecting the tops of the Us. This means that the lines passing
through them are captive, and that they bend around a tight turn (but it is, at
least, smooth). The Forestay acts in tension on the bolts that hold the stem
plate to the deck. The load is transferred from the deck to the hull via the
hull-to-deck joint, which will therefore tend to work some. The pinaker
fittings were incredibly wimpy looking. Didn't go below.

C+C 33: Stem fitting looked as if it were made for a 24 footer. The chocks were
essentially punched-out holes in the toerail. The portlights were the white
plastic ones that look fine for a few years and then crack because of too much
UV exposure. 

Tartan 34 (?): About 1.5"insultation on icebox. Handrails on deck were screwed
to coachroof instead of being through-bolted. The stove cover didn't fit over
the stove (!). The fittings on things like lockers and cabinets were basic
Perko stuff---chrome plated something-or-other.  All looked wimpy for their
assigned tasks. The stem fitting appeared to be black plastic (!). Even if
there's a real fitting beneath, this thing will decay in no time at all...
The sternline led froma well-mounted cleat out past the unfinished cut end of
the genoa track, which had a nice sharp edge. My God! The teak in the cockpit
was screwed ot the fglass, but the screws had no bungs over them.
   The wheel looked as if it had come from a 50 foot ocean racer. Oh wow. 
   The thru-hull fittings I could see had no seacocks on them. 
   Plumbing and wiring were neat and clean. Very nice.
   The flat aft-sections of the hull were increadibly noisy. With no wind to
speak of and 3" ripples, being in the quarterberth was like living in a bongo
drum. Headliner was carpeted throughtout, which might help absorb some of this
noise. Will also help mildew, of course...
   Hardware had nice backing plates, well bedded. 
   There was a small shelf aft of the nav station that was so flimsy that I
thought it was meant to slip out and get stowed when you were underway. But
no...this thing was for real. I can't imagine it surviving the first rough day
at sea. The nav table itself was a little, but not much, better.
   Then sink wa nice and deep. And the headliner was installed in panels, each
of which could apparently be removed. A good compromise between looks (using
a headliner) and practicality (being able to get at the deck fittings from
below).

Island packet: Generally nice construction, but not superb. The portlights
sloped a lot because the coachroof did so. If you ever opened one after a rain
(or some sea), you'd drop about half a cup of water aboard. IP used the same
cheap Perko fittings, undersized for their jobs, that I saw on so many others.
It also had an octagonal section boom, which is nice for attached hardware, but
mean to people. Didnt like the aft end of the boom, which had a fitting that 
was attached by pop-rivets. That makes it might tough to do repairs if one of
the internally-led reefing lines gets into trouble...

Wahoo sailboat, about 17': This little craft seemed remarkably well-made as a
small 2-or-3 person sailboat for protected waters. Lots of things were just
done nicely, and I got the feeling that it would take a bit of a beating.

Hunter 34 (maybe 35?): Thin plexiglass ports. Full headliner---no access to
fittings on deck. 3" insulation on icebox! Cleats were bolted through the
fiberglass, but not at a place where the core had been eliminated so that the
glass was solid---it went right through the core, begging for trouble. No
backing plates on the winches. No seacocks that I could see. Failed the "if I
fell" test, especially the table in the saloon. Unsersized fittings, especially
lifeline stancions (spelling?).

Hatteras 41 (powerboat); The first boat that had proper chocks at the bow and
stern. (Straight chocks at stern, angle-chocks at the bow). Solid
fittings--about double the size of the wimpy things I'd seen up until now. Too
much carpet inside and out for my tastes, and a forward cabin that looked like
the wet-dream scene from a 2nd rate porn film. There were a few things that
surprised me a bit: the gally items were mostly consumer-type items, like a
full fridge and an ordinary stove (like Kenmore or something). I think I begin
to understand why these boats leave their engines running long into the
night.... One interesting feature: the head contained a sink area with a
countertop that was some sort of fake marble. Not formica, mind you, but a
full 1.5" thick slab of something made of a heavy, solid plastic/ceramic
material. Weird!

Bayliner 4588: The cleats for the sternlines were mounted on the transom (which
was forward-raked, slightly). Basically, the axis of the cleat was pretty much
vertical. This is the *wrong* way to do things. In general, the Bayliners
failed the "if I happened to fall, would I break things" test in a big way. But
then, so did lots of the other small boats. The Bayliners seemed worse in this
regard, but for waterskiing on a lake, I'd think that many of them would be
just fine. 

Egg Harbor 37: A nice looking powerboat. Generally well laid out and with
decent fittings and solid-looking joinery.

This brings us to the last two of the boats that I looked at, which are
fascinating for their contrasts: the MacGregor 26 and the Crealock 34. 
Before I describe them, let me point out that the Mac 26 cost about 15K, and
the Crealock cost about 10 times that amount. The Mac was designed to sleep 4,
the Crealock to sleep 5. The Mac is trailerable, the Crealock is not :-). 
The Mac can be rigged up for sailing by one person in an hour or so. The
Crealock cannot. The Mac has an extremely open design that makes it possible to
get at absolutely  everything easily for maintenance; the Crealock, having
crammed much more in, would be harder to do maintenance on. But that brings us
to the end of the points on which the Mac wins....

MacGregor 26: This is a fun little boat for sailing in sheltered waters with
decent weather. I would not sail one to the middle of Lake Winnepesaukee on a
summer day, however, because there are frequently severe local Tstorms, and I
would not trust this boat to perform well in the conditions that might arise. 
Unfortunately, I lost my notes on this one, so have to go from memory: the
plumbing was all soft vinyl hose, already kinked in several places. It would
take half an hour to drain the cockpit on this thing... No seacocks. Wiring
was neat, but in the lazarette it was run through a hole that looked as though
someone had simply torn the bulkhead by hand---it was *really* ragged. Whole
boat had that "polyester resin" smell, which said "uncured resin" to me. 
Lots of fittings attached by sheet metal screws into fiberglass. Lots of items
aboard like a mini-loran, sold by E/B for something like $199, as a "extra" for
just $350...
   The boat failed, in every respect, the "if I fell against it" test. The
includes the pop-top setup in which the coachroof rises on flimsy posts to 
allow more headroom below. Under way, it was not held in place by anything I'd
trust either.
   I picked a few spots on the hull at random and pushed. They deflected
between 1/2" and 1". By contrast, I could not flex the hull of a laser at all,
and the Capri that I looked at (which was no treasure either) hardly flexed
more than 1/4" anywhere. 
   Still....if I had a friend who lived on a lake and wanted a trailer boat
cheap, and promised to check the weather *really* carefully, maybe I'd
recommend getting one of these, used. They've gotta be cheap on the used 
market. And they are a lot of boat for the money--roomy, well-ventilated (the
forehatch was the best think about the boat---its setting was well-stiffened by
the deck structure nearby, and it looked as if it would really ventialte the
boat beatifully) and obviously easy to sail and trailer. 

Crealock 34: The other end of the spectrum. The only thing I could find fault
with was that the cockpit locker was large enough, but had too small an
opening, to get a big sail out. If you ever had to change down to a storm jib
and a trysail, you'd have a realyl tough time getting the regular jib (or the
staysail) into this locker. And if you did, you'd never get it back out.
I know it's easy to cheer for the champion, and lots of other folks have said
how wonderful the Pacific Seacraft boats are in general. I went aboard with a
skeptical eye, and found a few things I didn't like. But even in my most
critical mood, I couldn't find much---it's just too damned good a boat. 

Below, they made the ideal compromise on the headliner: it's something like
vinyl cloth, held in place by teak strips, with a layer of foam, about 3/16"
thick, behind it. The cloth has lots of zippers in it, so that you can unzip,
push the foam aside, and get to the fittings without much pain. You can remove
some teak and *really* get at things if you want to. The foam is nice, because
it prevides enough insulation that you'll probably get very little
condensation behind the liner, and hence little mildew. 
   The fittings on the cockpit seat locker were wonderful--solid brass things
that were not going to break. Same for the fittings on the engine cover. Hell,
same for *everything*. I think that this boat *defines* the "if I fell"
test---I believe that there's very little stuff aboard that I could break
without using a tool to do it. 
   The mast is deck-stepped, which is not my choice, but this is compensated
for by a compression post that is truly remarkable. There's no doubt it can
take the load, and lots more.; The head is well-laid out with a fiberglass
liner that ensures that no shower-water will sneak out beneath a bulkhead, and
that it will be easy to wipe clean and keep clear of mildew. Much of the
interior joinerwork attaches to extensions of the hull fiberglass work, so that 
it acts to stuffen the hull structure, rather than just being attached to it. 
   I have five minor quibbles:  (1) The quarterberth is nice, but it will
probably become a glory hole--a place where everything gets tossed---and
therefore might have been better used as a seat locker. Where do you put your
fenders? (2) There's no wet-locker; I'd have used the forward 3' of the q'berth
for this. (3) the bronze portlights, mounted into the sloping surface of the
coachroof, might tend to catch water, but they have littel runnels cut in them.
Unfortunately, the angle of the runnels is not quite steep enough, so that the
forward portlights will still catch a half-ounce or so. Sigh. (4) The stove is
a standard "force" model, with not enough weight at the bottom to gimble
properly. One heavy pot on the top heating up some stew, and the thing might
choose to dump itself. (5) The holding tank for the head is an integral tank
under the forward V-berth. I'd hate to think of the problems if a leak
developed. I'd have preferred a braced-in-place, but separate, fiberglass tank.

   On the good side, look at things like these: split chain locker, double-
opening forward hatch, 3" bronze hawse-pipes led to cleats that are properly 
set, double sink, 4" icebox insulation, hull-to deck joint like a tanker, 
a welded "vane" that goes from the rudder post into the rudder, attaching it
more securely, and a steel post embedded in the skeg to reinforce it.

   Anyhow, enough. Suffice it to say that if you buy another boat, there are
lots of "improvements" you'll want to make. They'll cost a lot, and the
Crealock 34 already has them. Compare your dream boat with this one, and look
at this one for ideas for how to improve your dream boat. As far as I can tell,
there are no *bad* ideas on this boat; at the very worst, there are a few
choices made that differ from the ones I would have made. 

-John
Newsgroups: rec.boats