Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Dave via CnC-List]

In my 33-2 I eliminated the one creak I had by cutting the overhead liner out 
of the hanging locker interior and tabbing the bulkheads directly to the deck 
after filling the gaps with glass-filled epoxy, and then creating a nice 
raduised fillet.  I used epoxy and 2 layers (iirc) of biaxial stitch mat.  
Other 33-2s seem to have been built this way, while mine had the bulkhead 
simply fitted into a groove in the overhead liner. The 1985-6 33-2, and I 
presume others of the era (35-3, 41?) had the hull and deck fastened with large 
blobs of polyester putty in some places.  This had fractured in the hanging 
locker area, I cut it out and packed the gap with epoxy/chopped glass to 
reinforce.   
I also tabbed the liner to the hull under the v-Berth where the attachment was 
poorly done at the factory and had fractured.  Same process but with a limber 
hole incorporated.
Finally, a poor repair was cut out and replaced where the port-side bulkhead 
meets the hull, same process.
In each case this reinforcement was added inside a locker, so no cosmetic 
concern.  (Upgrade potentially)
FWIW I wouldn’t hesitate to do this on any production boat, but would only make 
the effort if attaching the bulkhead directly to the hull or deck.

Dave 
Sent from my iPad

> On Jun 10, 2020, at 12:07 PM, Bailey White  wrote:
> 
> Has anyone added material to tie the bulkheads to the liners for those 
> earlier boats?  I wasn't sure if the liner could take it or if some work 
> would need to be done to grind out the liner and fiberglass directly to the 
> hull laminate, which would be more involved and error prone.
> 
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Rob Ball 
> To: Shawn Wright , "cnc-list@cnc-list.com" 
> 
> Cc: 
> Bcc: 
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:39:15 +0000
> Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"
> Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, and as we 
> got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were the solution.
> 
> On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, and 
> eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  The first 
> boat was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to the deck – much 
> stiffer . . . . BUT . . . . it meant that the headliner, which is installed 
> on the deck when it’s upside down, had to leave space for the tabbing after 
> the deck is placed on the hull.  And then those spaces had to be covered up 
> with separate pieces to blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . . 
> Much more labor and cost . . .
> 
> But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter headstay  . .
> 
> Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .
> 
> The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage is 
> more extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .
> 
>  
> 
> Rob Ball   C 34
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Shawn Wright via CnC-List]

Thanks Nathan and Rob for the details on these. Unfortunately, mine are
completely gone, and it's hard to tell where they once were, although under
the right light I can see a few clues on the deck. I'm a bit done with boat
projects now after 4-5 months, but maybe next winter I'll investigate more.

--
Shawn Wright
shawngwri...@gmail.com
S/V Callisto, 1974 C 35
https://www.facebook.com/SVCallisto


On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 7:05 PM Nathan Post  wrote:

> Shawn,
> On my 34 the deck to bulkhead fittings also leaked and as I found out were
> installed through cored laminate that had rotted so they were not doing
> much good. I recored the deck and used a piece of ~6x6” 1/2 inch thick g10
> fiberglass in place of balsa where the tang bolts. Planning on cutting the
> slot in that and through bolting it again so hopefully it will be stiff
> enough not to leak. I am assuming that they are structurally required so I
> plan on putting them back.
>
> Nathan Post
> S/V Wisper
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Shawn Wright via CnC-List]

I have a copy of the same letter that came with our 35-2, #270. I also have
a table showing the pressures vs lbs force. I'll try to remember to share
it.

Some great insight on this thread! Our backstay adjuster needs a rebuild,
and won't go beyond about 800psi, but that is still enough to make the head
door difficult to latch. It has only come open once in heavy seas though.
With two forestays, I'm not sure how that affects things. We also have a
new holding tank under the v-berth; I wasn't aware the original one was
outboard of the head it sounds like?

--
Shawn Wright
shawngwri...@gmail.com
S/V Callisto, 1974 C 35
https://www.facebook.com/SVCallisto


On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 7:39 PM david--- via CnC-List 
wrote:

> I am not sure this picture will be small enough for the list. When I
> bought my 35-2, I found a memo from C in the nav  table saying the
> maximum back stay tension is 2050 pounds
>
>
>
> David Kelly
> Baraka C 35-2
> Noroton, CT
>
> On Jun 10, 2020, at 6:13 PM, Don Kern via CnC-List 
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Bailey
>
> I have one of those earlier C 35 Mk2 ('74 #255) and have *not* tried to
> attach the bulkheads to the overhead.  She does work in heavy air.  Two
> years ago the original outboard holding tank failed, which I had to remove
> by dismantling the head's bulkheads and cabinetry.  I replaced all screws
> with slightly larger ones since more than 50% were missing or stripped.  I
> put a new holding tank under the v berth and replaced all the screws
> connect the glass to the wood cabinetry in the forward cabin - 75 % were
> missing or backed out.  We are not shy about pushing her hard in the last
> 40 years I have raced her. Last year hit 11.8 kts in a double-hander spin
> run.  She does creak and grown.  The most annoying thing is the head door
> will not stay close and bangs open when we are working her hard.  About ten
> years ago I did an experiment at the dock of running a line from pulpit to
> pulpit (weight and small block at bow for constant tension) and ran the
> backstay up to 3000 psi - the line rose 2" up the mast (original unbending,
> telephone pole mast).  The most tension I will put on backstay when sailing
> in very heavy air is 2200 - 2500 PSI.  Since we still compete in the top
> 10% of PHRF races, I have no intention of changing the original set up.
> Don Kern
> *Fireball*, C Mk2
> Bristol RI
>
>
> On 6/10/2020 12:07 PM, Bailey White via CnC-List wrote:
>
> Has anyone added material to tie the bulkheads to the liners for those
> earlier boats?  I wasn't sure if the liner could take it or if some work
> would need to be done to grind out the liner and fiberglass directly to the
> hull laminate, which would be more involved and error prone.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Rob Ball 
> To: Shawn Wright , "cnc-list@cnc-list.com" <
> cnc-list@cnc-list.com>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:39:15 +
> Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"
>
> Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, and as
> we got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were the solution.
>
> On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, and
> eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  The first
> boat was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to the deck – much
> stiffer . . . . BUT . . . . it meant that the headliner, which is installed
> on the deck when it’s upside down, had to leave space for the tabbing after
> the deck is placed on the hull.  And then those spaces had to be covered up
> with separate pieces to blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . .
> Much more labor and cost . . .
>
> But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter headstay
> . .
>
> Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .
>
> The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage is
> more extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .
>
>
>
> Rob Ball   C 34
>
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Lee Youngblood via CnC-List]

Maybe a large, better quality jpg can be added to the website info. . .



> On Jun 10, 2020, at 7:38 16PM, david--- via CnC-List  
> wrote:
> 
> I am not sure this picture will be small enough for the list. When I bought 
> my 35-2, I found a memo from C in the nav  table saying the maximum back 
> stay tension is 2050 pounds
> 
> 
> 
> David Kelly
> Baraka C 35-2
> Noroton, CT
> 
>> On Jun 10, 2020, at 6:13 PM, Don Kern via CnC-List  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Bailey
>> 
>> I have one of those earlier C 35 Mk2 ('74 #255) and have not tried to 
>> attach the bulkheads to the overhead.  She does work in heavy air.  Two 
>> years ago the original outboard holding tank failed, which I had to remove 
>> by dismantling the head's bulkheads and cabinetry.  I replaced all screws 
>> with slightly larger ones since more than 50% were missing or stripped.  I 
>> put a new holding tank under the v berth and replaced all the screws connect 
>> the glass to the wood cabinetry in the forward cabin - 75 % were missing or 
>> backed out.  We are not shy about pushing her hard in the last 40 years I 
>> have raced her. Last year hit 11.8 kts in a double-hander spin run.  She 
>> does creak and grown.  The most annoying thing is the head door will not 
>> stay close and bangs open when we are working her hard.  About ten years ago 
>> I did an experiment at the dock of running a line from pulpit to pulpit 
>> (weight and small block at bow for constant tension) and ran the backstay up 
>> to 3000 psi - the line rose 2" up the mast (original unbending, telephone 
>> pole mast).  The most tension I will put on backstay when sailing in very 
>> heavy air is 2200 - 2500 PSI.  Since we still compete in the top 10% of PHRF 
>> races, I have no intention of changing the original set up.
>> 
>> Don Kern
>> Fireball, C Mk2
>> Bristol RI
>> 
>> On 6/10/2020 12:07 PM, Bailey White via CnC-List wrote:
>>> Has anyone added material to tie the bulkheads to the liners for those 
>>> earlier boats?  I wasn't sure if the liner could take it or if some work 
>>> would need to be done to grind out the liner and fiberglass directly to the 
>>> hull laminate, which would be more involved and error prone.
>>> 
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: Rob Ball mailto:r...@edsonintl.com>>
>>> To: Shawn Wright mailto:shawngwri...@gmail.com>>, 
>>> "cnc-list@cnc-list.com <mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>" 
>>> mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>>
>>> Cc: 
>>> Bcc: 
>>> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:39:15 +
>>> Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"
>>> Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, and as 
>>> we got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were the solution.
>>> 
>>> On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, and 
>>> eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  The first 
>>> boat was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to the deck – much 
>>> stiffer . . . . BUT . . . . it meant that the headliner, which is installed 
>>> on the deck when it’s upside down, had to leave space for the tabbing after 
>>> the deck is placed on the hull.  And then those spaces had to be covered up 
>>> with separate pieces to blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . . 
>>> Much more labor and cost . . .
>>> 
>>> But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter headstay  . 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .
>>> 
>>> The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage is 
>>> more extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Rob Ball   C 34
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 
>>> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
>>> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
>>> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray 
>>> <https://www.paypal.me/stumurray>
>>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
>> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
>> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Donald Kern via CnC-List]

David,
Thanks,
Never saw that piece of insight.  I have no idea how accurate the 47 
year old backstay gage is.  Those are relative settings that feel 
right.  Have not folded the boat in half nor driven the mast thru the 
keel  - yet!


Don Kern
/Fireball,/ C Mk2
Bristol RI


On 6/10/2020 10:38 PM, david--- via CnC-List wrote:
I am not sure this picture will be small enough for the list. When I 
bought my 35-2, I found a memo from C in the nav  table saying the 
maximum back stay tension is 2050 pounds




David Kelly
Baraka C 35-2
Noroton, CT



___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[david--- via CnC-List]

I am not sure this picture will be small enough for the list. When I bought my 
35-2, I found a memo from C in the nav  table saying the maximum back stay 
tension is 2050 pounds



David Kelly
Baraka C 35-2
Noroton, CT

> On Jun 10, 2020, at 6:13 PM, Don Kern via CnC-List  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Bailey
> 
> I have one of those earlier C 35 Mk2 ('74 #255) and have not tried to 
> attach the bulkheads to the overhead.  She does work in heavy air.  Two years 
> ago the original outboard holding tank failed, which I had to remove by 
> dismantling the head's bulkheads and cabinetry.  I replaced all screws with 
> slightly larger ones since more than 50% were missing or stripped.  I put a 
> new holding tank under the v berth and replaced all the screws connect the 
> glass to the wood cabinetry in the forward cabin - 75 % were missing or 
> backed out.  We are not shy about pushing her hard in the last 40 years I 
> have raced her. Last year hit 11.8 kts in a double-hander spin run.  She does 
> creak and grown.  The most annoying thing is the head door will not stay 
> close and bangs open when we are working her hard.  About ten years ago I did 
> an experiment at the dock of running a line from pulpit to pulpit (weight and 
> small block at bow for constant tension) and ran the backstay up to 3000 psi 
> - the line rose 2" up the mast (original unbending, telephone pole mast).  
> The most tension I will put on backstay when sailing in very heavy air is 
> 2200 - 2500 PSI.  Since we still compete in the top 10% of PHRF races, I have 
> no intention of changing the original set up.
> 
> Don Kern
> Fireball, C Mk2
> Bristol RI
> 
> 
> On 6/10/2020 12:07 PM, Bailey White via CnC-List wrote:
>> Has anyone added material to tie the bulkheads to the liners for those 
>> earlier boats?  I wasn't sure if the liner could take it or if some work 
>> would need to be done to grind out the liner and fiberglass directly to the 
>> hull laminate, which would be more involved and error prone.
>> 
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Rob Ball 
>> To: Shawn Wright , "cnc-list@cnc-list.com" 
>> 
>> Cc: 
>> Bcc: 
>> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:39:15 +
>> Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"
>> Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, and as 
>> we got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were the solution.
>> 
>> On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, and 
>> eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  The first 
>> boat was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to the deck – much 
>> stiffer . . . . BUT . . . . it meant that the headliner, which is installed 
>> on the deck when it’s upside down, had to leave space for the tabbing after 
>> the deck is placed on the hull.  And then those spaces had to be covered up 
>> with separate pieces to blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . . 
>> Much more labor and cost . . .
>> 
>> But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter headstay  . .
>> 
>> Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .
>> 
>> The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage is 
>> more extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Rob Ball   C 34
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
>> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
>> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>> 
> ___
> 
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
> 
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[dwight veinot via CnC-List]

My MKII 35 too

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 9:51 AM Della Barba, Joe via CnC-List <
cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote:

> My 35 MK I has been a bit flexible and creaky for 47 years now, so it
> seems to have worked out. Thanks for that explanation!
>
>
>
>
>
> *Joe Della Barba Coquina C 35  MK I*
>
> *www.dellabarba.com *
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
> --
Sent from Gmail Mobile
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Don Kern via CnC-List]

Bailey

I have one of those earlier C 35 Mk2 ('74 #255) and have _not_ tried 
to attach the bulkheads to the overhead.  She does work in heavy air.  
Two years ago the original outboard holding tank failed, which I had to 
remove by dismantling the head's bulkheads and cabinetry.  I replaced 
all screws with slightly larger ones since more than 50% were missing or 
stripped.  I put a new holding tank under the v berth and replaced all 
the screws connect the glass to the wood cabinetry in the forward cabin 
- 75 % were missing or backed out.  We are not shy about pushing her 
hard in the last 40 years I have raced her. Last year hit 11.8 kts in a 
double-hander spin run.  She does creak and grown.  The most annoying 
thing is the head door will not stay close and bangs open when we are 
working her hard.  About ten years ago I did an experiment at the dock 
of running a line from pulpit to pulpit (weight and small block at bow 
for constant tension) and ran the backstay up to 3000 psi - the line 
rose 2" up the mast (original unbending, telephone pole mast).  The most 
tension I will put on backstay when sailing in very heavy air is 2200 - 
2500 PSI.  Since we still compete in the top 10% of PHRF races, I have 
no intention of changing the original set up.


Don Kern
/Fireball/, C Mk2
Bristol RI


On 6/10/2020 12:07 PM, Bailey White via CnC-List wrote:
Has anyone added material to tie the bulkheads to the liners for those 
earlier boats?  I wasn't sure if the liner could take it or if some 
work would need to be done to grind out the liner and fiberglass 
directly to the hull laminate, which would be more involved and error 
prone.


-- Forwarded message --
From: Rob Ball mailto:r...@edsonintl.com>>
To: Shawn Wright <mailto:shawngwri...@gmail.com>>, "cnc-list@cnc-list.com 
<mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>" <mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>>

Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:39:15 +0000
Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, 
and as we got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were 
the solution.


On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, 
and eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  
The first boat was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to 
the deck – much stiffer . . . . BUT . . . . it meant that the 
headliner, which is installed on the deck when it’s upside down, had 
to leave space for the tabbing after the deck is placed on the hull.  
And then those spaces had to be covered up with separate pieces to 
blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . . Much more labor and 
cost . . .


But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter 
headstay  . .


Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .

The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage 
is more extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .


Rob Ball   C 34


___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Ken Heaton via CnC-List]

One strange looking keel...

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rHnWif-WO_I/WpMjx2P9d-I/AAABsVM/j0JahatW9CgQfrQN7O-a7GTWgDUx_fgDgCEwYBhgL/s1600/Wave%2BTrain%2B-My%2BShadow%2B%2B3.jpg


Ken H.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 16:59, Rob Ball via CnC-List 
wrote:

> But it had a Super Duper Brit Chance keel . . . . . . ?
>
>
>
> Rob BallC 34
>
>
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
>
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Rob Ball via CnC-List]

But it had a Super Duper Brit Chance keel . . . . . . ?

Rob BallC 34

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[David Risch via CnC-List]

My brand new to me 1981 40 with tired sails either stayed with or beat Wave 
Train boat for boat (without handicap)  around the cans consistently.  Owner 
was a really good sailor who was not happy with the boat.I was the last 
straw.  He sold it soon thereafter.

Failed experiment…

David F. Risch
(401) 419-4650

From: CnC-List  On Behalf Of Ken Heaton via 
CnC-List
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 3:33 PM
To: cnc-list 
Cc: Ken Heaton ; Bailey White ; Rob 
Ball 
Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

Hi Rob,

I recall C did that at the factory for Watt Webb's 37R "Wave Trane".

There is a drawing for the boat showing the addition of a waterproof crash 
bulkhead forward, all interior bulkheads tabbed to the deck above, an upgraded 
deck and bulkhead construction, and a weird custom Britt Chance aluminum & lead 
keel fitted.

http://c-c-37-40.blogspot.com/p/boat-design-c-37r-designer-robert-ball.html

Easier done to a boat like a 37R with fewer interior liners.

Ken H.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 15:06, Rob Ball via CnC-List 
mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>> wrote:
I sailed on a 40 and we cut the headliner back about 4 inches from the bulkhead 
– and taped the bulkhead to the deck.
Then used wood to fill in the headliner afterwards . . .
Not that hard, but labor intensive  . . . .

Rob Ball   C 34
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Ken Heaton via CnC-List]

Hi Rob,

I recall C did that at the factory for Watt Webb's 37R "Wave Trane".

There is a drawing for the boat showing the addition of a waterproof crash
bulkhead forward, all interior bulkheads tabbed to the deck above, an
upgraded deck and bulkhead construction, and a weird custom Britt Chance
aluminum & lead keel fitted.

http://c-c-37-40.blogspot.com/p/boat-design-c-37r-designer-robert-ball.html

Easier done to a boat like a 37R with fewer interior liners.

Ken H.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 15:06, Rob Ball via CnC-List 
wrote:

> I sailed on a 40 and we cut the headliner back about 4 inches from the
> bulkhead – and taped the bulkhead to the deck.
>
> Then used wood to fill in the headliner afterwards . . .
>
> Not that hard, but labor intensive  . . . .
>
>
>
> Rob Ball   C 34
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
>
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Rob Ball via CnC-List]

I sailed on a 40 and we cut the headliner back about 4 inches from the bulkhead 
– and taped the bulkhead to the deck.
Then used wood to fill in the headliner afterwards . . .
Not that hard, but labor intensive  . . . .

Rob Ball   C 34
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Bailey White via CnC-List]

Has anyone added material to tie the bulkheads to the liners for those
earlier boats?  I wasn't sure if the liner could take it or if some work
would need to be done to grind out the liner and fiberglass directly to the
hull laminate, which would be more involved and error prone.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Rob Ball 
To: Shawn Wright , "cnc-list@cnc-list.com" <
cnc-list@cnc-list.com>
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:39:15 +0000
Subject: Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, and as
we got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were the solution.

On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, and
eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  The first
boat was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to the deck – much
stiffer . . . . BUT . . . . it meant that the headliner, which is installed
on the deck when it’s upside down, had to leave space for the tabbing after
the deck is placed on the hull.  And then those spaces had to be covered up
with separate pieces to blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . .
Much more labor and cost . . .

But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter headstay  .
.

Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .

The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage is
more extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .



Rob Ball   C 34
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Della Barba, Joe via CnC-List]

My 35 MK I has been a bit flexible and creaky for 47 years now, so it seems to 
have worked out. Thanks for that explanation!


Joe Della Barba Coquina C 35  MK I
www.dellabarba.com


___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Rob Ball via CnC-List]

Earlier C’s had the bulkheads ‘floating’ in the headliner groove, and as we 
got into larger sizes (bigger loads) those tie downs were the solution.
On the C 40, there were a lot of warranty claims for those leaks, and 
eventually it was decided to stiffen up things to prevent this.  The first boat 
was the new C 35 and the bulkheads were ‘tabbed’ to the deck – much stiffer . 
. . . BUT . . . . it meant that the headliner, which is installed on the deck 
when it’s upside down, had to leave space for the tabbing after the deck is 
placed on the hull.  And then those spaces had to be covered up with separate 
pieces to blend with the headliner after the tabbing . . . . Much more labor 
and cost . . .
But – a much stiffer boat – the sailmakers loved the straighter headstay  . .
Victory by the designer over the accountants . . . .
The downside, other than cost is that when you hit a rock – the damage is more 
extensive, because the boat is now actually more brittle  . . .

Rob Ball   C 34

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Nathan Post via CnC-List]

Shawn,
On my 34 the deck to bulkhead fittings also leaked and as I found out were 
installed through cored laminate that had rotted so they were not doing much 
good. I recored the deck and used a piece of ~6x6” 1/2 inch thick g10 
fiberglass in place of balsa where the tang bolts. Planning on cutting the slot 
in that and through bolting it again so hopefully it will be stiff enough not 
to leak. I am assuming that they are structurally required so I plan on putting 
them back. 

Nathan Post
S/V Wisper
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Shawn Wright via CnC-List]

Our 35-2 has plenty of creaks but she still feels tough. I understand the
grid reinforcement that C and most others switched to in the late
70s/early 80s is responsible for a lot of the stiffness of the later boats.
In our case, the tangs holding the top of the forward bulkheads to the deck
were removed by a previous owner, so the plywood now floats in the liner
grooves, which I think is where most of the creaks originate. I do wonder
if the boat would creak less if those tangs were still in place. I suspect
they leaked, and that is why they were removed. I'm curious how the later
boats deal with the connection between bulkheads and the deck/liner, and if
there is any way to improve things on ours.

--
Shawn Wright
shawngwri...@gmail.com
S/V Callisto, 1974 C 35
https://www.facebook.com/SVCallisto


On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 1:13 PM Glenn Henderson via CnC-List <
cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote:

> I have driven our 41 mercilessly. Not because I want to abuse the boat,
> she seems to thrive in it. She just feels very tough. We have no creaks or
> groans except for the forward cabin door that came loose because of the
> motion. The 41 is an impressive design.
>
> Glenn and Lindsey Henderson
> C 41
> WeGo
> Treasure Island, FL
>
>
>
>>
>> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
>
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List Rob Ball comment on 41 "robustness"

[Glenn Henderson via CnC-List]

I have driven our 41 mercilessly. Not because I want to abuse the boat, she
seems to thrive in it. She just feels very tough. We have no creaks or
groans except for the forward cabin door that came loose because of the
motion. The 41 is an impressive design.

Glenn and Lindsey Henderson
C 41
WeGo
Treasure Island, FL



>
>
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray