I looked at a H260 for sale yesterday, and the previous owner had replaced the water ballast with some kind of solid material. When I lifted up the step, in addition to the valve, on either side of it he had installed 3 inch PVC threaded caps which allowed visual inspection of what appeared to be mortar mix. Is this a thing? Has anyone else done it? How does the boat perform?
Water ballast replacement?
- Thread starter TomwinFL
- Start date
I could write several paragraphs explaining why this is a disaster waiting to happen.
For starters, this boat could not be safely trailered. Even if you had a trailer and tow vehicle with sufficient capacity, the boat itself was not designed to withstand those loads and stresses while out of the water.
Another concern is the concrete ballast. What is preventing it from shifting within the ballast tank? What happens if the boat experiences a knockdown or other severe heel event?
There are numerous additional issues that could be discussed, but it's not worth spending more time on them. The fundamental problems with this concept should already be apparent.
To this I would only add that if the previous owner thought mortar in the ballast tanks was a good idea, he might have made other “improvements” that you don’t yet know about.
Yeah, I'm definitely gonna pass on this one. I was just wondering if it's a common modification. I know some have had issues with the smell of the ballast water, but that seems like a pretty drastic solution. I'd also be concerned about prolonged contact between the concrete and the FG.
I've seen proposals for concrete filled water-ballast (WB) boats on this forum before. I wonder if it's the same person. If it is, I guess he didn't like the advice he got here.
Since you own a 26, you're already familiar with its characteristics. These boats are quite tender initially, but they stiffen up after about 3 degrees of heel. To achieve good speed through the water, you generally need to learn to sail them relatively flat.
I had an H26 for about 10 years. I was shocked at what a difference a new mainsail made. Before the new main, I was reefing in about 9 mph of wind and was wrestling with weather helm the entire time. With the new main, I could hold my tiller with my pinky. I suspect that the WB boats are less forgiving of poor sail shape than a deep keel boat. Maybe Mr. Concrete was trying to fix a heeling issue and did not consider the sail as the culprit.
If you're sailing in fresh water, it is possible to increase ballast weight by dissolving salts in the ballast tank. However, the hassle-to-benefit ratio doesn't really seem worthwhile to me. If you are having heeling and weather helm issues, get a new mainsail.
I wonder if it’s the same boat that was mentioned in this thread a few years ago? Hunter 260 Ballast Modifications
If nothing else @rgranger ’s response to the idea is pretty consistent.
If nothing else @rgranger ’s response to the idea is pretty consistent.
I passed on that boat three years ago. I think that it was for sail in Florida (Pensacola?) . The owner admitted what he had done in the advertisement. I can't imagine that there are two boats like that. I bought a Hunter 240 instead.
Does anyone have a link for this boat? I am in need of some parts, including a boom. Maybe he would sell?
Concrete in a small water ballasted boat is a poor idea, however, concrete as ballast in larger boats and steel boats is not unusual. A steel boat I'm working on has lead and concrete ballast. The person who poured concrete into an H260 is guilty of misusing an acceptable solution.