O'Day 302 Loses Keel - Check Yours!!

Bob S · Nov 27, 2013

Just curious reading through this post. RichH mentioned about fiberglass fatigue and I was thinking about us northern boats where we rest on our keels every winter. After 25 years that on and off the keel must create some level of fatigue no matter how thick the glass is? Maine Do you remember how thick the stub was on your Catalina?

Gunni · Nov 27, 2013

...resting on their keels with a structural grid modeled and attached to the hull; unlike the O'day.

Tom J · Nov 27, 2013

I found some photos in my archives of the keel I mentioned in post #67. The boat is a 1971 O'Day 23, and the pics were taken in 1995 or thereabouts. The pictures are small, they were scanned into a computer from the hard copies. In one view, you can see the hole where the foreword bolt and it's backing washer pulled through the laminate. The other photos show how we stopped the leak until we could get her hauled.

Pat · Nov 28, 2013

All of the 302's had keels designed and constructed by "Hydrokeel"...the 302's we looked at as well as our 227 had large ss. backing plates...

eherlihy · Mar 7, 2014

I just stumbled onto this thread, and am really surprised at the construction of the 300 series.

I have a 1987 O'day 35, and my boat had to go through a keel replacement (on the PO's dime). The construction of the O'day 34/35 was very different from the O'day 302/322

Here is a pic of the bilge and keel bolt before the keel was dropped;

and here is a pic of the same keel bolt after the keel was dropped;

The white stuff is 5200, and it spanned the gap between the keel and the stub (about 1/8"), it filled the thickness of the hole through the keel stub, and it stopped at the backing plate.

To put it in perspective, the bolt is 3/4" wide, and you can see that the 5200 covers an area which is about 1¼" tall.

I wish that I had measured the thickness of the keel stub at the time. From the pictures, however, I can comfortably state that the keel stub of the Oday 34 and 35 is AT LEAST 3/4" thick, and recall from when I took the pictures that it is solid glass.

Skipper · Mar 8, 2014

I know this is an old thread, but another posted an update so I thought I'd chime in:

This type of dangerous problem, whether it's bad construction practices, light build, or rotten keel bolts, is why I chose a boat with an encapsulated keel. Never have to worry about this.

Sandy Stone · Mar 9, 2014

Note that the boat in the original post lost its keel because the hull skin failed, not the keelbolts. Not sure an encapsulated keel would prevent this.

Jackdaw · Mar 9, 2014

Skipper said:
I know this is an old thread, but another posted an update so I thought I'd chime in:

This type of dangerous problem, whether it's bad construction practices, light build, or rotten keel bolts, is why I chose a boat with an encapsulated keel. Never have to worry about this.

And this helps the average owner worried about this problem how?

Skipper · Mar 9, 2014

Sandy Stone said:
Note that the boat in the original post lost its keel because the hull skin failed, not the keelbolts. Not sure an encapsulated keel would prevent this.

Yep, sorry I wasn't clear. I was referring to the post just ahead of mine re keel bolts - the picture of the bolt that was half its original size. I've seen other pics on this forum where the bolts were as thin as nails, and broken off.

And, an encasulated keel spreads the load far beyond only a few keel bolts. I've never heard of one falling off.

Skipper · Mar 9, 2014

Jackdaw said:
And this helps the average owner worried about this problem how?

It's commentary. Same as your response. Except valid, and without the confrontational attitude.

Maybe the original post was for Oday 302 owners, but others posted comments about other boats IE: Hunter 340, other Odays, etc. regarding their keels. It's called a "topic". Maybe someone considering the purchase of a boat, or someone not knowing about keels\bolts\encapsulation, may find it interesting. If not, then skip it and go to the next post.

Jackdaw · Mar 9, 2014

Skipper said:
It's commentary. Same as your response. Except valid, and without the confrontational attitude.

Maybe the original post was for Oday 302 owners, but others posted comments about other boats IE: Hunter 340, other Odays, etc. regarding their keels. It's called a "topic". Maybe someone considering the purchase of a boat, or someone not knowing about keels\bolts\encapsulation, may find it interesting. If not, then skip it and go to the next post.

It's not being confrontational, it's just a question. Your comments seems to spring from limited experience with just one older boat, and often include absolute comments like 'best', 'always', or 'never'. I find the world of sailing much more complex and nuanced than this, and so if I comment I try and comment in a way that helps, and not just use 'topics' as a way to simply proclaim how great I happen to think my boat is.

Skipper · Mar 10, 2014

Jackdaw said:
It's not being confrontational, it's just a question. Your comments seems to spring from limited experience with just one older boat, and often include absolute comments like 'best', 'always', or 'never'. I find the world of sailing much more complex and nuanced than this, and so if I comment I try and comment in a way that helps, and not just use 'topics' as a way to simply proclaim how great I happen to think my boat is.

It was a confrontational question, with no relevance. Why did you not question the others who posted about their experience with one older boat?

You have misread, as usual. Let me re-phrase, for the sensitive among us: "This type of dangerous situation may be a good reason to study encapsulated keels vs bolt on." There, I've eliminated my hideous ego. Happy?

I've been boating longer than you've been alive; probably, based on my perception of your age. I've been sailing for over a decade, and in So Cal Pacific Ocean where it's all-season, which is probably double or triple the sail time in your meat locker state. I've owned 6 boats, performed uncountable hours, days, weeks, years of labor, research, hands-on, trial and error, and enjoyment. I've written articles for Sea Magazine, rebuilt old boats, sailed them in many weathers and formats.....and I know the difference between keels.

Look at the photo album at the boat I've just spent 3 years bringing back from the boatyard dead, then tell me again how I have "limited" experience.

eherlihy · Mar 10, 2014

Because I resurrected the thread, and b/c my point seems to have been missed by at least one poster, here it is; not all O'day boats were built with the same thin keel stub as the O'day 300 series. In general, I believe that the build quality of the O'day 34/35 (probably other models too), if not the interior, was comparable to that of Pearson Yachts of the same vintage.

Skipper · Mar 10, 2014

Maine Sail said:
Encapsulation can have other issues so one needs to make a decision based on many factors.

Personally I would buy a bolt on external ballast before encapsulated, but I sail in Maine and the North Eastern US.... For a rocky granite coast encapsulated ballast would probably be my last choice, unless really well executed. Caliber is a builder who executes encapsulated ballast quite well with a fore edge crash box which is sealed off from the encapsulation.

I have seen far too many encapsulated boats hit rocks and then require months of drying out the keel before any repairs can be made. A proper repair of an encapsulated keel can take eons to dry properly. Builders also cut corners and try to use cement, boiler punchings, scrap iron etc. etc... This results ina keels section that is wider / fatter than necessary had they used lead.

A few years ago I watched an Island Packet sit on the hard burning up an entire sailing season before it was dry enough to repair. How does one put a value on missing an entire season..?

On the other side I have seen external lead inspected, dried, ground & patched up while still in the slings and dropped back in all in the same day.

I have also seen encapsulated keels split open in the winter due to entrapped water (see pic below), likely from an earlier grounding and improper dry-out time... Sometimes the water comes from above. In some instances I have seen internal ballast which was driven right through the cabin sole and into the vessel thus voiding the very thin "water tight" membrane over the keel and allowing the boat to take on water.

While there are some builders who did encapsulated well, such as Caliber, many do not and the dry out times after a hit can be extensive to correctly repair the damage. This can mean an out of commission boat for a good part of the sailing season, if you find hard bottom.

This was one of my customers boats with internal ballast. The internal ballast got wet, it froze and split the entire keel bed meaning more water drained into the encapsulation. It became a constant battle. Note the upwardly cracked fiberglass between the bilge hoses... The customer wound up selling the boat.

Some builders even used boiler punchings and when they get water logged, then freeze..

For those who don't think bolt on is robust enough this was a Hunter 340, a boat many pooh-pooh as a "production boat". Pretty darn tough, if I do say so myself....

Check out this chunk out of a lead keel below!!! That was a HARD HIT, about as hard as it gets. This boat did not sink nor lose the keel. It was not even leaking. All keel bolts were still intact despite there being only a few of them compared to some other builders in this size range and this was. It was remarkable that just five bolts survived this sort of punishment.

This was a FULL BORE hit to solid immovable granite. Both the keel and hull survived to sail another day. While the keel was re-set, it was more to inspect and die test the bolts.

If that 4100 pound lead keel on a 11,000 pound Hunter 340, with only 5 keel bolts, can handle that, how do you suppose the 3850 pound 12 bolt keel on this 36' 8900 pound day sailor would do? It would likely move the granite!!

That said the keel stub of that Hunter is nearly 3/4" thick and the O'day 322 I have seen and measured was approx 1/4". Too thin for my tastes....

There are vast differences in quality among encapsulation built boats as well as external bolt on. Buy a well built example of either type and you'll be doing well.

Buy a boat with multiple known keel failures and you'd be best do your home work and probably hire an NA to go over the design and offer his/her ideas......

World cruiser brands such as Morris, Passport, Hinckley, Halberg Rassy, Malo, Cape Dory, Gozzard Yachts, Valiant, Pacific Seacraft etc. etc.. are all examples of builders who choose external ballast. Most of these boats are some of the most coveted cruisers ever built and very, very rarely have keel issues..

I always loved this quote by famed designer Bob Perry to my post above:

"I too would prefer external ballast."

Some bolt-ons are much better than others. Your notes are well taken, and true.

Bristol did the keels right. Mine is 30 years old and is as fair as a California bride (pics after barrier and bottom done). It's all lead, with no detectable voids or moisture. Also, I am aware of the possible issues with this type of keel, including the worry about hitting rocks. I've never hit rocks, nor has the boat in 30 years, nor do I plan on it. And, if I do, I will be drastically happier with costly and time-consuming repairs, than having the keel fall off altogether. It is enormously more possible that the keel bolts would rot than my hitting rocks*, and hard enough to cause that type of damage. I like the bliss of not worrying about keel bolts. :dance:

*At least, the possibility of hitting rocks will be far less, when I return to So Cal where I belong, with its deep and vast Pacific

In any case, for me, going hard aground on a reef or rocks would be the death of the boat and possibly myself, regardless of keel format. It may not be, but I view it as such, therefore avoiding the situation at all costs.

Skipper · Mar 10, 2014

eherlihy said:
and b/c my point seems to have been missed by at least one poster

I'm guessing I'm your target, since I'm the favorite.

All of these posts are from the same thread:

Bobm, about his S2 9.2A – “Also glad my keel is integral to the hull and very strong”
And about a Newport 30 - “I also walked from a last generation Newport 30, which showed extensive keel damage after a grounding.” -if you read his entire post, he's made a buying decision based on information from this thread.

Hermit Scott, commentary: “To me the idea of having nuts and washers holding a catilevered 4000 lb. lead beam whose center of gravity can be 18" away is a bad idea. But that is how most fin keels are made.”

Mainsail, about a Cat 30: “I found my notes the other day from my conversations with Catalina during the keel re-set of my old C-30. I had spoken with Gerry Douglas..”

Ross, on an Alberg: “Some boats are just as structrually sound today as when they were launched forty years ago. The Alberg 30 comes to mind.”

Tommays, on his J: “My 1981 fin keel J24 was most likely overbuilt a bit as it was the first Jboat and after 28 years of regular racing it shows no signs of of problems”

Kendall: “what type of keel was it? Is it an issue with the keel type, or an issue with the boat itself? Just curious, both my boats have encapsulated ballast”

FastOlsen: “I used to own a Niagara 26, for a decade. This was the smallest sloop built in the early 80's by high-end builder Hinterhoeller Yachts. The external lead fin keel was a Petersen design and bolted thru the flat bottom of the sump with some unidirectional roving or bands of heavy glass fiber laid up….”

So, all of these people commented regarding their boats, and\or other boats. So why am I the only one who is attacked? How is it that my comments are off-topic?

Also, I was commenting on Eherlihy’s post, specifically the attached pictures, which by the way were also of a different model. Not commenting on the original post. The pictures looked like bad bolts. My error I guess for not being specific, but really, who cares? What difference does it make? Why throw out obnoxious questions and comments? (not you, Eherlihy, the Jack...daw)

Jackdaw · Mar 10, 2014

Skipper said:
It was a confrontational question, with no relevance. Why did you not question the others who posted about their experience with one older boat?

You have misread, as usual. Let me re-phrase, for the sensitive among us: "This type of dangerous situation may be a good reason to study encapsulated keels vs bolt on." There, I've eliminated my hideous ego. Happy?

I've been boating longer than you've been alive; probably, based on my perception of your age. I've been sailing for over a decade, and in So Cal Pacific Ocean where it's all-season, which is probably double or triple the sail time in your meat locker state. I've owned 6 boats, performed uncountable hours, days, weeks, years of labor, research, hands-on, trial and error, and enjoyment. I've written articles for Sea Magazine, rebuilt old boats, sailed them in many weathers and formats.....and I know the difference between keels.

Look at the photo album at the boat I've just spent 3 years bringing back from the boatyard dead, then tell me again how I have "limited" experience.

This thread has only been about one thing... the potential of catastrophic failure of the keel/hull interface on O'day 3xx series boats.

As part of the ongoing discussion, several owners of other O'Day models have commented as well; wondering both if the problem might extend to other models, and to offer evidence that it might not, at least in their boat. As it sits, it appears that it does not.

So the attention centers on this particular series, and the joint. As on any boat that might suffer from this issue, there are at least three possible scenarios.

1) The calculations on the required strength to support the shear and tension loads of the bolts was faulty.

2) The translation of those calculations to a layup schedule designed to support that load was performed incorrectly.

3) The actual layup performed was substandard of the schedule.

People are just looking for answers. Because in general, a properly designed and built keel/hull joint is immensely strong and can last the lifetime of the boat.

As anyone that understands marine architecture would tell you, encapsulated keels are simply a different way to attach a keel to a sailboat. They have their own sets of pluses and minuses. They certainly are not categorically 'better' as you proclaim. Most here simply want to know if their O'day is safe. If you have something specific to add to that discussion, I've very sure it will be welcome here.

PS - My old college debate team coach told me that once someone responds to your point with an insult, the logical part of the discussion is over. As such, I'll not respond to you again; in particular to your thoughts on my age, sailing resume, or my 'meat locker' state.

Skipper · Mar 10, 2014

Jackdaw said:
This thread has only been about one thing... the potential of catastrophic failure of the keel/hull interface on O'day 3xx series boats.

I've pasted commentary directly from the thread showing that others had posted exactly the same types of comments as I.

Jackdaw said:
As anyone that understands marine architecture would tell you, encapsulated keels are simply a different way to attach a keel to a sailboat. They have their own sets of pluses and minuses. They certainly are not categorically 'better' as you proclaim.

I never said the keel was "better". I said that the lack of bolts is why I chose it. Try again.

Jackdaw said:
If you have something specific to add to that discussion, I've very sure it will be welcome here.

I did.

Jackdaw said:
PS - My old college debate team coach told me that once someone responds to your point with an insult, the logical part of the discussion is over. As such, I'll not respond to you again; in particular to your thoughts on my age, sailing resume, or my 'meat locker' state.

You STARTED with your insulting response. And to commentary very similar to others'. Very confusing. Then you called me lacking in experience and pointed at me as a single-minded boasting baboon. No respect begets the same, sir. However, I do regret the insults, and retract all.

I don't take kindly to people mouthing off to me, and you are becoming infamous for it. If I state something that may be incorrect, then discuss it, or ignore it, but don't start with your sarcasm and insults, then accuse me of some impropriety in the response you get.

Ron20324 · Mar 10, 2014

As my dear ol' pappy used to tell us boys, "to argue with a fool only proves there's two of them".

O'Day 302 Loses Keel - Check Yours!!

.

.

.

.

Attachments

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Attachments

.

Attachments

.

.

.