Neglected bottom - should I buy?

[RichW9603]

Hi all,
Could really use the collective input of all the experienced hands here. I found a nice boat I want to buy, a 1990 Hunter 33.5. It had a new barrier coat and good paint job done on it about 8 years ago, at which point it was trailered halfway across the country to its current location (which is in fresh water). The problem is, from talking with the owner, it sounds like he only had the bottom cleaned (by divers in scuba gear) once a year, but never had it hauled out to have new bottom paint put on. He swears up and down that the bottom is fine but his incentive is to sell the boat for the most he can get. I don't think he actually sailed it all that much, but that might not matter. What do you think? I have arranged for a survey to be done in a few days, but the problem is there is no lift at the marina to pull the boat out and I hear finding someone with a trailer and rig near the marina to pull the boat out just to look at the bottom is going to be impossible. The broker trying to sell the boat says he has an underwater camera so the surveyor can take a look at the hull, but that it probably worth zero. What do you guys think? It could be really expensive to have to pay someone to drive 300 miles or whatever with a rig and trailer just to pull the boat out for an hour inspection, if I could even get anyone. It looks to be a great boat for me aside from that, but that sounds a lot like "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?"

Thanks for any thoughts.
'Dubs

 

[Ted]

What's the point of having a survey done if the bottom can't be inspected. You'd be missing important information which will help you make an informed decision. I would not recommend buying a boat without seeing what lies under the water. The boat may be fine but you risk buying a boat with blisters, a damaged keel or rudder or structural damage caused by a grounding. If you can't inspect the entire boat, I would continue looking for another boat. There are plenty for sale and most of them are visually accessible.

 

[Apex]

Good points Ted. I checked on yacht world, there are a dozen 33.5 available currently.
Including 2 94's in Kemah, TX

 

[RichW9603]

Good points Ted. I checked on yacht world, there are a dozen 33.5 available currently.
Including 2 94's in Kemah, TX

True, but I am really focused on the 88-90 years due to the sloping foredeck. After those years they changed it and not a fan. The pickings are slimmer, which is why I was trying to see if maybe this wouldn't be a game-ender.

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

It does seem strange that, in an area you are in where lots of boats get shuffled around for various reasons that it is impossible to get a short haul somehow.
Regardless, absent the seller giving me a written guarantee and buy-back agreement, I think this is a walk away.

 

[RichW9603]

Regardless, absent the seller giving me a written guarantee and buy-back agreement, I think this is a walk away.

Interesting Don. How would this guarantee be written? "Major unexpected adverse determination of hull condition upon removal from water and cleaning" or something? Not sure the best phrasing but that would help offer assurance currently missing.

I'm going to call the marina and see if they have any ideas for a haul-out for inspection.

Let me ask this, if it truly has been eight years without new bottom paint and just annual cleanings, what kind of hull problems or degradation would that cause? Marine grown that is annoying to clean is one thing, but increased risk of osmosis /core saturation / delamination / "pox" is much more structural.

 

[Justin_NSA]

8 years is a long time. I don't think any paint is effective that long. So for sure you will need to have it repainted if/when you buy it. The concern for blistering is real. Is there any way to really check without removing the paint?

 

[centerline]

if the boat is in fresh water, and has a barrier coat, an antifouling paint would be unnecessary, and arguably, so would the need for repainting every few years..... algea in freshwater isnt so much of a problem, but its the marine organisms in the saltwater environment that causes issues....

and where there are a number of bigger boats, there has to be a way for them to be launched and hauled.... although in freshwater these places may be fewer and farther between due to less need for the boats to be hauled, scraped, and painted every couple of years, but the need for hauling is still very necessary at times....
and the haulout places will either have a launch ramp/tram, a travelift or a sling... the ramp/tram or travelift is necessary for a rigged sailboat...

and even though we dont know where the boat was before it was taken to the freshwater lake, OR how it has been taken care of by its owners (past and present), but all things being equal, an older freshwater boat will nearly always be a better buy than a saltwater boat.... the salt water and salt air takes its toll on everything, but it was probably new enough when it left the salt environment that it may have very few effects of it....

 

[RichW9603]

Good thoughts everyone, I really appreciate it.
The biggest thing I am worried about is that the lack of painting may have expedited blistering problems with the hull. Ted brought up a great point that there are other reasons besides blisters to be worried about, such as hull damage from impacts. About the blisters though, would the lack of regular bottom paintings accelerate any problems with that? Marine growth is a pain to get off but not damaging to the inherent structure of the hull, but if the lack of regular paintings increases the chances for bad blistering or "pox" then that's a much greater liability.

 

[RichW9603]

Also, I called the manager at the marina and asked if he knew of anyone who regularly hauls out boats on a trailer for painting or inspections. He says it is very rare that happens, and very few (if any) people at the marina haul out their boats every year, even every two, for new paint. Instead everyone just has divers come out and clean the hull. Just because everyone is doing it (or isn't doing it, in this case) doesn't mean it is right, but I did think that maybe what the current owner has been doing didn't set off alarm bells with the marina manager.

 

[seadaddler]

How about have a diver give it a good look over and maybe with a camera too,
where would you even be able to haul for a repair or new bottom paint.
Where will you be keeping the boat and where would you be sailing.
Nick

 

[Scott T-Bird]

There is a lot of time between 1990, when the boat is new, to 2008, when the boat last had a barrier coat applied. Is there any information about earlier years? The boat should be hauled for inspection or you should probably walk away. That said, the bottom condition could be a surprise not matter what you find during inspection. These photos show the condition of our hull after 12 seasons in fresh water (6 months in water, 6 months on land each year) with no treatment whatsoever. During that time, the outward appearance never changed. Then we had her sand-blasted in preparation for new barrier coats and ablative. All those tiny holes and some crazing of the gel coat in a localized area was exposed (to be fair, there was a hint of the crazing through the paint). I had no idea if the paint was a barrier paint or not ... I was told after sand-blasting that it did not appear to be barrier paint. The boat originally came from Texas, and it appears that it was kept in water year round for the first 10 years without any barrier coat. After that, it was in New Jersey for about 10 years, seasonal use in brackish water, apparently with little or no attention to the hull paint. Then we purchased and kept seasonally on freshwater lake for next 12 seasons with no attention to the bottom paint.
Fairing the hull with epoxy before applying barrier coats is going to cost $1,800. Then, prepping the hull and applying coats of barrier and bottom paint (4 coats total) is going to cost $1,700. I expect the bottom to be in decent shape after all is said and done ... good enough to serve the boat for the rest of my life anyway. Not so bad, considering possibly 30 years of near total neglect.
If you accept the boat as is, you should anticipate possibly $4,000 to $5,000 to service the bottom. It's up to you if you want to negotiate that in the price or not. You may also find little need to do anything to improve the bottom paint condition. There may be little downside to doing absolutely nothing, even if there are hidden blisters. There is nothing fatal about blisters. That's also up to you. Despite the care that many people put into the bottom of their boat, there may be far less need to worry about it than many suggest. Fiberglass seems to take a lot of abuse in stride.

 

[SailingGestalt]

My two cents... my short haul identified over $6K worth of rudder gudgeon and through hull damage which was all repaired and paid for by the owner prior to purchase. If you cant take a look at the bottom with a surveyor I would walk away and keep looking.

 

[Jackdaw]

Can't speak for what you might miss, but the scenario you describe is rather common on lots of lakes in the lower half of the USA. Far enough south so they don't freeze, and big enough for bigger boats, but with no sailboat facilities. So they go in and stay in. We sailed on Degray Lake in Arkansas for a winter, and the very nice marina was FULL of boats that have not been out of the water in 10+ years. When a boat comes to the lake, the owner hires a crane company to lift it on or off a trailer. Very costly. They don't pull unless they are leaving.

 

[RichW9603]

Can't speak for what you might miss, but the scenario you describe is rather common on lots of lakes in the lower half of the USA. Far enough south so they don't freeze, and big enough for bigger boats, but with no sailboat facilities. So they go in and stay in. We sailed on Degray Lake in Arkansas for a winter, and the very nice marina was FULL of boats that have not been out of the water in 10+ years. When a boat comes to the lake, the owner hires a crane company to lift it on or off a trailer. Very costly. They don't pull unless they are leaving.

Jackdaw this is exactly the scenario I am facing. When the boats are pulled after 10 years of being in the water, do you know if they usually have more problems than boats which were regularly repainted? The broker is trying to tell me that fresh water boats can go forever without new paint and all they need is a power washing, but of course he won't be the one holding the bag if it is wrong. It's starting to sound like the folks who do this with their boats due it more due to practicality than good practice, which has me cautious about stepping into that.
I'll try to call around and see if other marinas know of a hauling service.
Thanks again everyone, and double thanks for the pictures Scott. All those little pock marks on the hull in your photos, are those blisters?

 

[Scott T-Bird]

I think they are blisters that penetrate the gel coat but don't go into the laminate, so I am not worried about them. They will simply be filled with epoxy to fair the hull. I couldn't tell you what period of time these blisters could have formed. My guess would be that the condition developed during the first 3rd of the boat's life while in warm southern waters year-round with no barrier coat (just a hard ablative paint). I would also guess that if the bottom has a more serious condition of blisters into the fiberglass laminate, that it would be apparent through the bottom paint.

 

[DSqr]

I'd have two concerns with a 33.5 of that age. I have just paid for the repair of the keel joint (smile) for the second time. If you can't inspect the joint, I'd agree with the others that you should account for it in the price of the boat, and $1,500 to $1,800 is the going rate here on western Lake Michigan. The other concern, which you should be able to inspect is the compression post. These years still had the wooden compression post which has a tendency to rot. It's a major repair.

 

[Jackdaw]

Jackdaw this is exactly the scenario I am facing. When the boats are pulled after 10 years of being in the water, do you know if they usually have more problems than boats which were regularly repainted? The broker is trying to tell me that fresh water boats can go forever without new paint and all they need is a power washing, but of course he won't be the one holding the bag if it is wrong. It's starting to sound like the folks who do this with their boats due it more due to practicality than good practice, which has me cautious about stepping into that.
I'll try to call around and see if other marinas know of a hauling service.
Thanks again everyone, and double thanks for the pictures Scott. All those little pock marks on the hull in your photos, are those blisters?

Of course the issue is you are talking about ONE PARTICULAR BOAT. But in general if they've been barrier coated well normally the bottom should be fine. And you are right that is done for totally practical reasons.

If I were doing that I would barrier coat it, and forgo paint. Then factor in a diver to clean/inspect it X times/year depending on water clarity.

 

[centerline]

Good thoughts everyone, I really appreciate it.
The biggest thing I am worried about is that the lack of painting may have expedited blistering problems with the hull. Ted brought up a great point that there are other reasons besides blisters to be worried about, such as hull damage from impacts. About the blisters though, would the lack of regular bottom paintings accelerate any problems with that? Marine growth is a pain to get off but not damaging to the inherent structure of the hull, but if the lack of regular paintings increases the chances for bad blistering or "pox" then that's a much greater liability.

you said it was barrier coated.... this barrier coat is the most effective means to prevent blisters... lack of paint, lots of paint, painting every year, or never ever being painted.... none of the painting matters when it comes to blisters.
and sometimes neither does a barrier coat, but its the best chance you have if the boat is kept in the water... the only way to insure a polyester hull will never blister is to keep it on a trailer in your yard..

but when was it barrier coated, we dont know how many blisters may have been painted over.....one can only assume that due to the cost of barrier coating, it was done with some forethought and done right to insure the best chance at success.... and after all your worrying, do some in-depth reading about the study of gelcoat blisters...there is a lot on this site if you search.
you will find it is almost always a cosmetic problem, and is more of a issue in the eyes of the owner than it is in the life or quality of the boat.....but it is indicative of the quality of the resins that were used in the GELCOAT process...
some people are fine with a few blisters, others shy away from them like its a catchable disease..... others will buy a boat and then spend many thousands of dollars to eradicate them, and then barrier coat, only to have the blisters reappear.... and then just live with them being there.

 

[Alexander38]

Hey Scott T-Bird, I have owned a 1986 Hunter 34 for fifteen years now, and in my opinion, the bootom looks fine. It just needs a few coats of bottom paint and you're all set! Good luck with the purchase!