Where did you get the idea that the Catalina 27 had a foam core hull?  
It doesn't.  I've seen a cutout and it is about an inch thick solid 
fiberglass near (but not too near) the keel.  Interesting conjecture 
that water in the bilge contributes to blisters though, I think there 
might be some truth to that.

John Harker   C27   'Prana'   #6261   Santa Cruz

JOE ROSE wrote:
>  
>
> Hello Doug,
> I need to introduce myself here as well. I just joined the C-27 owners 
> as well. I have a small boatyard here in western SC where we work on 
> primarily sail boats. We regularly do jobs ranging from simple bottom 
> work to complete restorations. I also own a C-25, C-27 and several 
> other brands as well. At this time our C-27 is our primary boat ans we 
> absolutely love it.
>  
> I would like to share some experience from, perhaps a different 
> perspective.
> First off when buying a boat there is no such thing as normal 
> blistering. Almost invariably, boats that keep a dry bilge will have 
> no or very few blisters and it makes no difference about the brand. 
> Transversely boats that have a wet bilge will almost invariably have a 
> belly full of blisters depending on how long it's been since the last 
> bottom job. Blisters are expensive to fix and it is very difficult to 
> dry out a Catalina hull. Catalina's have a foam core that absorbs 
> water like you simply would not believe. I have a Capri 25 in the 
> slings right now that I opened all the blisters, tented it out and 
> used dehumidifiers (2) and two fans on for over two months before we 
> got all the water out. That is around 50 gallons of water, and the 
> bigger the boat the more area it has to absorb water.  I start here as 
> this is likely your biggest and most time consuming expense. Around 
> here blisters run between $2.5-10. each depending on how deep they are.
> Next, the nuts on the keel look terrible, but more often than not it 
> something of an illusion. The last one we did, after properly sitting 
> the boat on it's keel we simple removed the old nuts and reinstalled 
> new stainless nuts. This is still pretty time consuming project even 
> with all the proper tools and a crane to lift with. This is likely 
> going to be a job for a yard unless you have a way to lift the boat so 
> as to get full contact on the bottom of the keel.
> Next, a new mainsail even with my 20% discount it is going to be 
> expensive. I used to send all my sails out to Sail Care in Ford City 
> Pa. They would come back and look wonderful, but what I finaly figured 
> out is that, while they look great, they don't sail any better. A 
> blown out sail is blown out, at that point it will heel the boat more 
> than driving it. This sail is the most important means of propulsion 
> on the boat. It amazes me how often people will gladly spend money on 
> cosmetics and neglect the sails all together.
> OK, lets look at a more overall view. I am assuming you will do the 
> bottom on any boat you buy so we'll leave that out.
> 3k for the boat
> 2K for blisters (avg =200)
> 1.5K new main
> 1K new electronics
> 1K new halyards, window/hatch reseal kits etc.
> So now we are at $8500.00 +/- and we have yet to address anything to 
> do with the engine, cushions, or the rotten bulkhead.
> The only problem I have with this math is that when finished you will 
> have a fine boat that would be worth around 10K if you sold it and you 
> had to do all the work, so where is the incentive to do this? If you 
> were to value your time in here at even $25 per hour the cost of this 
> boat is pretty upside down.
> Right now there are some really good boats out the for less than they 
> normally bring due to the economy being in the crapper.
> On the other hand if you are one of the bonehead people (like 
> myself) who actually love working on boats and consider it privilegege 
> rather than a chore, then by all means grab this thing up. Restoring 
> boats makes no financial sense whatsoever, but it is quite gratifying 
> to stand back and look at my work. Keep in mind here that doing things 
> right takes alot more time than we are used to.
> Best Regards
> joe rose
>
> --- On Sat, 1/23/10, Don Burnett <[email protected] 
> <mailto:DonJamBur%40aol.com>> wrote:
>
> From: Don Burnett <[email protected] <mailto:DonJamBur%40aol.com>>
> Subject: Re:[IC27A] Re: Possible purchase of a C27
> To: "[email protected] <mailto:IC27A%40yahoogroups.com>" 
> <[email protected] <mailto:IC27A%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Date: Saturday, January 23, 2010, 3:12 PM
>
>  
>
> Doug. The rigging (and engine) are key evals. Rigging keeps the mast
> up w compression all manner of forces. Most of what you listed is
> "expected" more or less. Blisters could be an issue depending on
> scope. You may want to sister in some addl keel bots and the rest of
> labor you'll need to invest is not insignificant and a pain such as
> leaking ports or windows. Roller furling us a big plus if not racing
> and that's $1.5k or so. Running rigging not cheap either. Do it up
> right. Bottom line - wait for balance of survey and DO negotiate it
> down. Walk if you need to. Price of survey is worth every penny if
> done well and it sounds good. Don't forget to ask for moisture
> readings that a good surveyor will do for deck, rudder etc. I know
> you want a boat and seller knows it too. Hang tough. You've got a lot
> of "work" ahead of you. Assess your willingness to invest the time and
> think about if you want to be sailing or working on boat. Perhaps
> there will be another better suited to your pref. I love my c27 and
> you will too. Just keep it real and maintain some distance and
> perspective.
>
> Don
> 1981 #4855
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 11:06, "Doug" <dj2...@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > Well we had the survey yesterday which I was present for and lasted
> > all day. The boat was hauled and the bottom was inspected. Still
> > waiting for the service guy to evaluate the engine. I don't yet have
> > the write up
> > Findings so far (most I knew about) are;
> > 1. Very neglected 1-2 yrs, spider webs, mud dauber nests, water in
> > bilge, etc
> > 2. Keel bolts are SS but nut are steel and are very deteriorated
> > 3. Mainsail very dirty, stained in fair condition
> > 4. !50, 110 hank on sails very good condition (5-6 yrs old)
> > 5. Sail cover shredded, non usable
> > 6. All ports leaking
> > 7. Lifelines in good condition
> > 8. Electronics non working (wind speed, direction, depth, boat speed)
> > 9. Dead Batteries but battery charger good
> > 10. All electrical systems work
> > 11. Bottom looks ok ('normal' amount of blisters?) Keel straight,
> > minimal slop in rudder, cutlass bearing ok
> > 12. Most lines needs updating.
> > 13. rigging-I had to leave so have to wait till I get the survey
> > paper.
> > 14. waste tank ok but the hoses need redoing.
> > 15. water tank- ok
> > 16. Fuel tank ok but needs new filler hose. There appears to be no
> > fuel filter in line to engine.
> >
> > If the engine evaluation comes back ok, good compression, etc then I
> > am still very interested.
> > This boat was listed for $9750.00 and I offered 5k contingent upon
> > survey. The surveyor siad he would probably value it less maybe 3k.
> > Do you think I should re-negotiate less?
> >
> > Doug
> >
> > --- In ic...@yahoogroups. com, "dj2210" <dj2...@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I just wanted to introduce myself. I have a deposit on a 1982 C27
> > standard rig. This Friday we will haul and survey so maybe will own
> > it this weekend. She will be sailed in east TN after I do whatever
> > needs doing. The first thing will be the port bulkhead due to rot at
> > the chain plate. (Finding some marine ply might be a problem) This
> > boat looks ok but has not been sailed for at least a year so needs a
> > lot of attention. New running lines, new cushions, sealing the
> > ports, etc, you get the idea. It has an A4 that has not been started
> > for some time. I will probably have questions as we come across
> > problem areas but this site and links has so far given me a wealth
> > of info.
> > > Thanks
> > > Doug
> > >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 

Reply via email to