Back to the UK for a winter refit

[wakeup]

Cosmetics / appearance is one thing and subjective -beauty is in the eye of the beholder etc etc,
But I would be more concerned about
1- cantilever forces on the attachment(s) -vertical down ward forces -( 4-5 folks sat on the back edge @ anchor or a fat person jumping down on to it )
2- wave slap @ anchor on the attachment(s) -vertical upward repetitive forces -8-9 tons of boat anterior to it bobbing about
3- exhaust -regurgitation- you will only know when its done ?
4- residuals re buyers surveyor finding an excuse to chip or more ?

1- JTB is planning a .5m extension, he is a bright bloke who will no doubt design something strong. The extra 500mm isn't going to make a material different on the moment so I doubt there is much to worry about here.
2- Probably the same concern and issues as 1 above, if properly built which it will be then nothing to worry about, many, many boats have far larger overhangs/platforms and closer to water level.
3 - Exhaust are under water? How would the exhaust be regurgitated, the intakes are a long way from the BP.
4 - I think this mod will improve the residual, so many modern boats have large platforms, look at the T38 platform by comparison, this will increase the market potential for a buyer. I doubt anyone will say, "ah but it is not in original factory condition". I also think the issue of additional mooring cost is a red herring. 500mm would only add £100 to £250 per annum to the berthing costs, anyone considering this boat wouldn't be worried by that.

 

[petem]

anyway fabricating an entire new platform would be megabucks, so its not worth the trade off imho.

Interesting, I would assume that the cost of modifying a platform (particular to maintain / increase the structural integrity) may not be that much cheaper than making an entirely new one. If it was me, I'd like the option of reverting if the new platform didn't work.

 

[jfm]

1- JTB is planning a .5m extension, he is a bright bloke who will no doubt design something strong. The extra 500mm isn't going to make a material different on the moment so I doubt there is much to worry about here.
2- Probably the same concern and issues as 1 above, if properly built which it will be then nothing to worry about, many, many boats have far larger overhangs/platforms and closer to water level.
3 - Exhaust are under water? How would the exhaust be regurgitated, the intakes are a long way from the BP.
4 - I think this mod will improve the residual, so many modern boats have large platforms, look at the T38 platform by comparison, this will increase the market potential for a buyer. I doubt anyone will say, "ah but it is not in original factory condition". I also think the issue of additional mooring cost is a red herring. 500mm would only add £100 to £250 per annum to the berthing costs, anyone considering this boat wouldn't be worried by that.

I completely agree with you wakeup, and with Nick's point above about residuals. On all counts, I think this is going to be a great improvement that will work well, and when executed with OCD OEM-looking perfectionism by JTB will add to residual value (if JTB cares, which I doubt he does). It will indeed need correct bracketry to attach it strongly (iirc, the t40 already uses a diagonal strut under the platform; this might need its gauge increasing)

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

4 - I think this mod will improve the residual, so many modern boats have large platforms, look at the T38 platform by comparison, this will increase the market potential for a buyer. I doubt anyone will say, "ah but it is not in original factory condition". I also think the issue of additional mooring cost is a red herring. 500mm would only add £100 to £250 per annum to the berthing costs, anyone considering this boat wouldn't be worried by that.

Mmm I'm not so sure. As a potential buyer I'd be asking myself whether it adds any functionality to the boat (apart from a convenient landing spot for JtB's deckchair!) in exchange for the extra mooring costs and then I'd be asking myself whether the modification had been done properly (which I'm sure it will be but as a potential buyer I dont know that). I suppose to a Med buyer its a useful addition but to a UK buyer it may not mean much. IMHO, JtB is adding far more resale value to his boat with the engine overhaul; as a potential used buyer, providing I understood why the overhaul was carried out, I would be thinking that I'd be buying several hundred hours of trouble free engine operation and that would certainly make the boat more attractive, at least to me

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Well, I'm with you on this one Jimmy, the pods will make it look like Fairline made it that way. They are the weakest link tho as they are made more of plastic than grp and most that I've seen have had a bump and been cracked.

Side access along the pontoon would be much improved by creating this side step area if you think about DjeFabs' Squadron. I found the side step area good on the Phantoms too, possibly a good profile to keep in mind.

Btw. There's a great GRP guy in Southampton that I've used for invisibly closing a massive vacant dashboard hole from a C120 GPS display. He also rebuilt a new dash and repaired some crash damage for Elessar (not his fault). I would definitely recommend him most strongly for this job. He would also help by giving you ideas on how to achieve your goal.

If needed PM me for details.

Just a thought, have you considered the freeboard under the new platform if you were to slow down too quickly coming off the plane? The T40 sits much lower with D6s' over Kads'

RR

Here's a (not very good) pic of a T40 in Lisbon that has extended the bathing platform, and the side pods, in the way that I had in mind for my own boat:

Thanks for the GRP recommendation. Yes please - I'll send you a PM.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Or it could look like a bad attempt to make it look OEM. It's a bit like extending a house, it's difficult to disguise an extension, sometime it's better to make a feature out of it. Or it could just look **** if the lines aren't right.

If your domestic extension looks that bad, you're using the wrong builder...

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

And if it shows just pebble dash it......

What you need there mate is a bit of monocouche render...

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Cosmetics / appearance is one thing and subjective -beauty is in the eye of the beholder etc etc,
But I would be more concerned about
1- cantilever forces on the attachment(s) -vertical down ward forces -( 4-5 folks sat on the back edge @ anchor or a fat person jumping down on to it )
2- wave slap @ anchor on the attachment(s) -vertical upward repetitive forces -8-9 tons of boat anterior to it bobbing about
3- exhaust -regurgitation- you will only know when its done ?
4- residuals re buyers surveyor finding an excuse to chip or more ?

Hiya L

My view on these points, in turn:
1. I agree this point. The remedy is two additional s/s struts, plus replacement of the existing centre s/s strut so that it picks up the load further aft
2. I don't think this'll materially different to the current arrangement. If it really was a problem (it won't be) then the answer is to cut some holes in the platform and locally re-do the teak
3. I don't see this a problem at all
4. I completely don't care about residuals. I like the boat and I'm making it the way I want it. I have no plans to sell

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

providing I understood why the overhaul was carried out

That's a really key point. Although I have no plan at all to sell the boat, there will be a zillion photos plus this thread to explain that no, the boat has not been underwater or suffered some other catastrophic event, it's just housekeeping.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

OK. Yes BCU haha! I need to convert!

85 is good, 90 is very good. There isn't anything I've seen beyond high 80s currently, and 85 is generally the best that is easily available, and is tangibly better than 75-80. Anything say 85-88 is going to look/feel pretty good. Do not imho fall into the trap of going for too-warm white. It's personal choice of course but we are a bit conditioned from years of incandescent bulbs. I would say get 3000k inside not 2700, and 4000 exterior. My boat is all 3000/4000 as per spec, though of course manufacturers' tolerances vary a bit and it is hard work getting perfect match if you are OCB

Anyway if you want I can lend (post in jiffy bag) you some 3000K/88% to try/experiment with, 70mm holes so might not fit but will make for an experiment. There are so many now available you are sure to find one that fits your existing holes

If you get those retrofit little circuit boards with 7 LEDs on them or whatever, they will look rubbish I'm afraid. Those LEDs are just not made for CRI. Getting high CRI means adding a more exotic cocktail of metals, and costs money

Remember the dimming circuitry will impose a need for surgery on your boat to get at the wiring. With Cantalupi you have a v small dimmer unit which needs 6 wires: DC supply in, DC out to lights, and a pair of terminals that need to be joined by a non latching momentary switch. The momentary switch does on/off plus cycles thru the dimmer range (and "remembers"). Of course you can fit as many parallel switches to this pair of terminals as you want, if you want to switch the same lights from 2,3,4 locations, etc.

PS catching up with this - yes please to a loaner fitting, I'll send you an email.

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

The horns corrode around the top where the boot joins item 2 and the do corrode lower down.

I think you are a bit high on exhaust horn price .

But its a cost benefit calculation ie reduce breakdowns and future big bills for something you can sort now at component cost rather than component cost, labour, lift out and engine out and then refit all back again.

We did the walkaround on the engines today. The horns are corroding at the top exactly as you described here, so I'm going to follow your suggestion and replace them. The recommendation is to also replace the rubber boot, although these look fine to me. Any opinion on this?

The water injection elbows on mine are stainless steel and are in good condition; they need a mild clean inside but that is all.

 

[Portofino]

Hiya L

My view on these points, in turn:
1. I agree this point. The remedy is two additional s/s struts, plus replacement of the existing centre s/s strut so that it picks up the load further aft
2. I don't think this'll materially different to the current arrangement. If it really was a problem (it won't be) then the answer is to cut some holes in the platform and locally re-do the teak
3. I don't see this a problem at all
4. I completely don't care about residuals. I like the boat and I'm making it the way I want it. I have no plans to sell

Thx J
Glad you understood what I mean,t by " attachments ( s) "
If its beefed up -the bits that peeps don,t see then all should be well - sorry if teaching grandma to suck eggs
If its not " residuals ' comment was aimed at surveyor finding stuff like star glazing arround " attachments (s) " and / or
Leaky joints where it inserts into mother boat -due to flexing .- and putting buyer off .
It's the bits out of sight that are the most important going forwards - that's the piont I was trying to debate .
Pods -yup look right in the pic

 

[wakeup]

Post 165. Now that just looks right to my eyes.

 

[Portofino]

We did the walkaround on the engines today. The horns are corroding at the top exactly as you described here, so I'm going to follow your suggestion and replace them. The recommendation is to also replace the rubber boot, although these look fine to me. Any opinion on this?

The water injection elbows on mine are stainless steel and are in good condition; they need a mild clean inside but that is all.

Rubber poss hardens off - may increase crack susceptibility ? = replace

 

[Elessar]

Mmm I'm not so sure. As a potential buyer I'd be asking myself whether it adds any functionality to the boat (apart from a convenient landing spot for JtB's deckchair!) in exchange for the extra mooring costs and then I'd be asking myself whether the modification had been done properly (which I'm sure it will be but as a potential buyer I dont know that). I suppose to a Med buyer its a useful addition but to a UK buyer it may not mean much. IMHO, JtB is adding far more resale value to his boat with the engine overhaul; as a potential used buyer, providing I understood why the overhaul was carried out, I would be thinking that I'd be buying several hundred hours of trouble free engine operation and that would certainly make the boat more attractive, at least to me

A UK buyer would be delighted that a Fairline flaw ie difficult stepping onto an alongside berth is fixed. And it is worth every penny of the extra LOA charge.

I'm watching with intrest as my 390 became the F43 and I would like to extend mine one day.

Post costs Jimmy

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

A UK buyer would be delighted that a Fairline flaw ie difficult stepping onto an alongside berth is fixed. And it is worth every penny of the extra LOA charge.

Yup good point, didn't think of that. Just seen JtB's photo of the Portugese T40 and it doesn't look half bad

 

[RogerRat]

And if it shows just pebble dash it......

:encouragement: Like it.

RR

 

[RogerRat]

Yup good point, didn't think of that. Just seen JtB's photo of the Portugese T40 and it doesn't look half bad

+1
Looks right to me too.

RR

 

[jfm]

Here's a (not very good) pic of a T40 in Lisbon that has extended the bathing platform, and the side pods, in the way that I had in mind for my own boat

Looks very good Jimmy. Keep the pods, long live the pods! More pics of that bost here:

 

[benjenbav]

That platform looks ideal, creating a really useful and good-looking area behind the tender garage.