Start watching this video at 4:50 and take a look at the thickness of the fiberglass under the bow of this large and new Beneteau. I don't think the glass could be over 1/8th of an inch thick. At that spot, my forty year old Tartan is about and inch and a half. I was still surprised at this. This spot had flexed so much that it had popped off the exterior gelcoating. That's how they first noticed it, snorkeling under the boat.
This confirmed for me why a lot of the newer design boats don't interest me.
- Thread starter Les Pendleton
- Start date
We have a small fleet of 2006 - 2008 Hunters at our club. After a club race two years ago one of the 33's was coming back in and lost power just off our break wall, could not get the diesel restarted. They had all hands on deck, dropped anchor but before it caught they just nosed into the rip-rap on the bay side of wall before pushing themselves off. That bump punched a hole in the bow of the boat. When they got back in, the boat was hauled immediately to keep it from sinking, the fiberglass was also no more than an 1/8th inch, the gelcoat was almost as thick.
That would have been a scary situation if the boat had hit anything when they were further off shore. Hitting something like a container would have been a total loss.
The repair was as the video did, foam, more glass etc.
That would have been a scary situation if the boat had hit anything when they were further off shore. Hitting something like a container would have been a total loss.
The repair was as the video did, foam, more glass etc.
I had no idea it had gotten to this point in new boat construction. I've heard supporters of the newer designs say things like "strength is in engineering, not fiberglass thickness". I just don't agree. I sailed on a 33' Beneteau a couple of years ago in the Hawks Channel off Key West. With only an eighteen knot breeze and a hundred percent working jib, NO MAIN, we were burying the rail and every time a two foot chop hit the bow it would knock us slightly off course. I knew then that was not what I wanted in a boat. The older ones can be put back into shape and to my money you'd have a better boat. Even if you paid a marina to do the bulk of the work you'd be dollars ahead of buying an expensive new one. I guess I'm just getting old and stuck in my ways.
I watched the entire video, not just for the repair but to enjoy their adventure. Later, they show them underwater when they discovered the problem. Gelcoat was popping off under the water from all the flexing. I'm sorry, that's a very expensive boat, not like an Oyster or Hinckley but still, a lot of money and if I owned it I'd be sitting on the doorstep of the Beneteau factory till it was fixed.
Island Packet supplied a bag with samples of the hull layup plus two plugs from the hole saw that cut the tranducer holes in the hull. It was a very reassuring to know there was no skimping on construction.
I wonder if the plugs from a Beneteau or Hunter would reassuring or scary?
I wonder if the plugs from a Beneteau or Hunter would reassuring or scary?
I put a new depth transducer in my C&C several years ago. I was happy to see the hull was about 1-1/4" thick, solid glass. No signs of moisture or delamination after about 30 years. Of course back in the 70's they didn't engineer the material, just added more layers if they were in doubt. I know they use grid structures to stiffen the hull now rather than simply add more layers of glass but 1/8" is way to thin for any part of the hull on a cruising boat.
when I moved it's galley from the starboard side to the port side for a customer. That plug is 7/8 of an inch thick. Boat was built in 1962
Maybe not. Unless you plan on having your widow sell it, market value is what justifies repair and refurb expense (or not). TCO= purchase cost + maintenance and upkeep - sell price.
I was very surprised (pleasantly) at how thick the hull was on my 2001 Catalina 42 when I saw the plugs that were taken out for transducer installs. Catalina is a bit more "old school" in many of their build processes. If you peel the onion and look at the size of standing rigging, depth of bilge, backing plates, battery installations, bulkhead structure, etc., they outshine Beneteau in most cases. Beneteau usually has more bells, whistles, and pizazz. Most of the buying public is focused on the "look" of the boat rather than the method of securing the batteries.
Very true Steve. One of our favorite dock neighbors has a newer Catalina 34 and that boat is stout. I don't have exact numbers in front of me but while on the lift crew I had the opportunity to pull his mast as well as those of the Hunter 33's and also to help lift and block up both boats. The Catalina was way heavier as was his single spreader mast.
All boats are different. Even my Dragonfly tri (which is designed to be lightweight) has thicker sections in that area. I have a transducer plug that was cut from the centerline that's an inch thick of solid layup, but the cored areas are very thin skinned (maybe 1/8" on each side of the foam cored composite) but very rigid and don't flex much at all. Experienced boaters who walk my decks have commented on how solid the boat feels.
Then there's the issue about the construction of the layup resin and fibers.
Then there's the issue about the construction of the layup resin and fibers.
It appears the thruster tunnel was added after initial build and Beneteau cut out a wedge section beneath the thruster tunnel to gain access and glass in the tunnel tube. Then they did a crap fiberglass repair job and failed to blend the wedge cutout section back in with enough overlapping layups. That was a really bad.