Hunter 1977 25'

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jack Harness

While doing work on the deck were my mast plate bolts down, I found the support beam was not under the mast. I will have to move the mast back about 2" to catch the beam. I will also have to install an additional support next to the beam already in place. This will give me full support under the mast. Has anyone else had this problem? It appears this is the way it came from the factory. Thanks for your help, it may be a safety issue.
 
D

David Foster

Same set-up on our '77 h27

The offset allows you access to the mounting hardware and wiring coming from the plate. If the cored deck is in good shape, it has plenty of stiffness to transfer the load 2 inches to the compression post. Due to the water damage of the core, we just bebuilt the whole deck under the mast, except for the bottom layer of glass, and the cabin liner. We found no reason to move the beam, or associated compression post. I recommend leaving the structure as designed. There are _no_ accounts in the archives of this site (or other sources of which I am aware) of failure of this structure if the members are sound. All the problems I do remember involve rot due to water. David Lady Lillie
 
Jan 22, 2003
744
Hunter 25_73-83 Burlington NJ
Why?

Some considerations: Why do you feel you have to move the mast? Is there any collapse of the compression post structure or main bulkhead? Has the deck deteriorated? Is there evidence the mast was ever moved to the wrong place before? The boat was designed as it came from the factory, fully safe and functional. There are reasons why it appears to be the way it is. Be sure you FULLY understand them before altering basic design parameters, especially because of fear or a 'feeling' it is 'somehow wrong'. (Can you tell I've heard this before?) I realise many engineer types can over-analyse some things. The reality is that the H-25 is a 4000-lb boat with 250 sq ft of sail using 1/8" wire shrouds and 'chainplates' that are nothing more than bent stainless-steel sheet metal held down with a couple of 1/4-20 bolts per side. This represents a realtively small boat for which most engineering arrangements are already probably overkill. You may safely assume that there is insufficient stress on the rig, and therefore insufficient compression on the mast, to wreak any serious damage to support structures under the deck if it's simply left as designed. Of course problems due to age, neglect, abuse, and modifications by owners not fully understanding yacht design and construction are another issue entirely. BTW I own a 1974 H-25, and the centre of my mast step is, of course, also 2-3 inches forward of the main bulkhead. I am replacing the mast compression post with a 3-pc one of sitka spruce-- but this is due to age and a little rot in the sole structure, not because the original compression structure was badly designed. Also I have discovered a little softness in the main deck beam but it is not enough to worry about and I will simply dry it out, saturate it in epoxy, and re-bed the SS mast tabernacle using 5200 against the deck and epoxy down the blind bolt holes. That'll fix it. Remember the guy that designed your boat has been called one of the true art-and-engineering geniuses of late-20th-C yacht design and I wouldn't mess-- AM NOT messing-- with anything he meant to be right. Trust me. I know better. (Then again, if you want to induce even more weather helm and create a whole new set of structural issues to deal with, by all means ignore this advice.) JC 2
 
C

Crazy Dave Condon

Amen to J. Cherubini 11

Jack, you would be foolish to change the compression post. Cherubini 11 summed it up very well. By the way, it was a Cherubini who desigen this boat for Warren Luhrs the founder of Hunter. I am assuming Cherubini is the son and if that is the case, heed well to his advice. Crazy dave condon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.