Bruce Farr Design ruins Beneteau First reputation

[Daydream believer]

the quality control in the benetau was reported as fine. So how is this statement relevant? Have you actually read the report?

The statement was perfectly relevant to the quote I included in my post, which used the car industry as an example. Did you not read the comment to which I was referring?

 

[Skylark]

I would guess...........

You seem to be very good at guesswork. That and potentially libellous comments.

 

[AndrewfromFal]

You seem to be very good at guesswork. That and potentially libellous comments.

+1

 

[rotrax]

Of course. ...you two fact free "engineers" might at least want to be aware that Sunsail's current fleet is a derivative of the Farr 40, not First 40.7. Not that one should ever let facts get in the way of the truth ...poor old Bruce Farr ...and his clients

Interesting-Sunsails PS website calls them matched Sunsail FIRST 40's..............................

 

[flaming]

Interesting-Sunsails PS website calls them matched Sunsail FIRST 40's..............................

They are a derivative of the first 40. Different keel (i.e. not a T keel) and slightly shorter rig, and I think there were some changes to layup to make them easier to repair. Though that might just have been rumour...

 

[Talulah]

There have been a number of Beneteau 40.7 where the owners have had warranty work carried out (or in one case I know of the yacht replaced) only after a non-disclosure agreement has been signed.
Non-disclosure agreements put the owners in a really akward position. It's a shame there aren't some whistle blowers.
Some people on this forum probably know of the cases I'm refering to.
Similary, if there was a problem with your model of boat would you want it to be public? It may affect resale value.

 

[dom]

Interesting-Sunsails PS website calls them matched Sunsail FIRST 40's..............................

The "Sunsail Match First 40" is a very different boat to the First 40.7 you referenced above. I've no idea what you and the OP are out to prove; that you don't like Beneteau, don't like Bruce Farr, or don't like liner hulls? ...fair enough. Instead you both claim the authority of "qualified engineers", proceed to ignore the facts as presented to the extent of even becoming confused about the boat model in question, and then season your argument with a bit of faintly libelous invective against Farr and Beneteau. Given the tragic case underpinning these two threads I think you should stop, before you end up saying something that...

 

[markhomer]

When looking for a boat a few years ago , nearly bought a sigma 38 , every said that they were bomb proof and great sea boats ,

Was suprised to find that they too are very suceptible to matrix popping off on a single grounding even and advised to buy one that had had matrix job done , 10 s of boats had allready been done , however, with hull layup being so thick from what i heard wasnt a life threatening occurance and didnt put me off , unfortunately price for 30 year boat was , so i bought another boat with keel falling off reputation , i was gazzumped on a sunfast 37 , keel loser too , oh and am sailing a 40.7 this weekend offshore

Folks should take a look at yard at ardfern and see the mighty range of keel off repairs they do there , dont think there are many exception manufacturer wise .

Its not how its built ,its what you do with it and how its been treated , 40.7 maib proves that

 

[niccapotamus]

the most interesting thing about this thread isn't the issue about the Ben but the way it highlights that the YBW forums seem to struggle to manage a polite debate - too often they subside into rudeness bordering on trolling - the sort that only usually occurs after about 8 pints.

I inhabit a few different ones - guitar/music, motorbikes and YBW. YBW is by far the least tolerant (with the exception of the rabid US harley forums).

Are we not able to be polite and show a little more tolerance for differing viewpoints?

 

[lw395]

When looking for a boat a few years ago , nearly bought a sigma 38 , every said that they were bomb proof and great sea boats ,

Was suprised to find that they too are very suceptible to matrix popping off on a single grounding ....

In my experience, Sigmas, like any decent OD fleet are very susceptible to some damn fine close racing, which means sooner or later they will hit the bottom at full chat. Last time I did that in a decent racing dinghy, the bill was into 4 figures...

 

[AndrewfromFal]

Your comments on this appear to be to rubbish another posters opinion.

Shooting fish in a barrel is a hobby of mine, - not very sporting I know, but sometimes it's hard to resist. If it wasn't so easy I'd pack up and go home, but both you and the OP make confident assertions whilst stating 'facts' that betray apparent lack of basic knowledge (as two examples, the OPs comment about Jeanneau's in house designers; and your inability to distinguish the difference between the First 40 and the 40.7).

If you possess the level of knowledge and experience you both claim to, it should be easy to make me (and some of the other people who have commented here) look foolish, - but if that's not possible, you both deserve to have the mickey taken out of you for making potentially libelous and reputation damaging comments that you can't back up.

 

[AndrewfromFal]

When looking for a boat a few years ago , nearly bought a sigma 38 , every said that they were bomb proof and great sea boats ,

Was suprised to find that they too are very suceptible to matrix popping off on a single grounding even and advised to buy one that had had matrix job done , 10 s of boats had allready been done , however, with hull layup being so thick from what i heard wasnt a life threatening occurance and didnt put me off , unfortunately price for 30 year boat was , so i bought another boat with keel falling off reputation , i was gazzumped on a sunfast 37 , keel loser too , oh and am sailing a 40.7 this weekend offshore

Folks should take a look at yard at ardfern and see the mighty range of keel off repairs they do there , dont think there are many exception manufacturer wise .

Its not how its built ,its what you do with it and how its been treated , 40.7 maib proves that

I remember racing and cruising a 38 in the mid 90s; great boats and great racing, - that they tended to be a bit leaky around the keel attachment was something much discussed amongst the owners at the time; although I'm not sure it was always due to a bit of impromptu plowing, or more a build quality issue. No one seemed overly concerned about it either way.

 

[niccapotamus]

I think this thread should have had a question mark on the title - I think the Cheeky Rafiki publicity will make people question the reliability - the fact that this thread exists is enough to suggest that it is the case and it might have an impact on resale values of some boats.

We have now drifted onto keel stability issues - and the simple response is to look at the boat in relation to intended use - I think if you are going to take a production fin keeler with certain design characteristics offshore you might get the keel beefed up as part of the preparation - ditto if you are using one as a sailing school or charter boat perhaps. Up to individuals to risk assess - same as you would any boat/design.

Westerly are a good example; centaurs are great boats, as are griffons, but you would have a look at the keels and perhaps make sure that they had been modded before bouncing them up and down on a drying mooring etc! Overall it hasn't necessarily impacted on values except as part of the usual purchasing process a purchaser would bear in mind the cost of the work when buying one s/h

 

[AndrewfromFal]

the most interesting thing about this thread isn't the issue about the Ben but the way it highlights that the YBW forums seem to struggle to manage a polite debate - too often they subside into rudeness bordering on trolling - the sort that only usually occurs after about 8 pints.

I inhabit a few different ones - guitar/music, motorbikes and YBW. YBW is by far the least tolerant (with the exception of the rabid US harley forums).

Are we not able to be polite and show a little more tolerance for differing viewpoints?

I'm not sure if you're just making a general point, or have specific posters in mind (if it's the latter then you probably mean me); I agree that everyone should be heard, but when confident assertions of fact that are possibly libelous are made, backed up by half facts, misinformation and hearsay, you shouldn't expect anything other than a robust response.

Maybe my work environment is more aggressive than many (although I doubt it), but if someone made a proposal in a professional capacity in the business I work for backed up with such scant 'evidence', the kind of response you get on here would pale by comparison.

 

[rotrax]

I agree. Proper debate-not very often.

Poster "dom" for example-he jumps in without reading previous posts. He has accused me of claiming the authortity of a qualified engineer.
NOWHERE have I claimed that status-in this thread or others.
I am however a highly experienced Technician/Mechanic of 50 years experience and have ridden my self prepared racing mororbikes in some of the most arduous and dangerous races in the world.
I know about personal safety-and how to achieve it.................................

 

[AndrewfromFal]

I think this thread should have had a question mark on the title - I think the Cheeky Rafiki publicity will make people question the reliability - the fact that this thread exists is enough to suggest that it is the case and it might have an impact on resale values of some boats.

I'd agree with you on that, as it may have lead to a more interesting and civil discussion, but that wasn't how the OP chose to frame the thread. Post #1 makes it clear that the omission of a '?' wasn't a mere oversight, either.

 

[dom]

I agree. Proper debate-not very often.

Poster "dom" for example-he jumps in without reading previous posts. He has accused me of claiming the authortity of a qualified engineer.
NOWHERE have I claimed that status-in this thread or others.

Here is what you wrote in the other CR thread:

"When I studied automotive technology in the early sixties I had to write a paper on a great designer.
I chose Henry Ford, but studied others"
Read more at http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?429092-Cheeki-rafiki-maib-report/page26#2U1WeVSG48qRv6xl.99

I always thought only academics and market specialists wrote papers? Look this is all getting a bit silly, the title of this thread is bordering on libelous and as I pointed out you have even got your boats mixed up (very different keel structures incidentally). There is of course an important engineering/safety discussion to be had here along the lines of what Talulah and others have described.

However, if I were you I'd keep off the entire "slag-off" angle here. It is always fun to give a gratuitous kick in the goolies to a big company one perhaps doesn't like very much; just be aware that these companies can kick back too! Incidentally most major companies routinely scan the net for articles, discussions, etc which reference their brand. I'm going to pull out of this particular line of discussion now; it's a free world out there.

 

[awol]

Suggesting to a mother that her baby is less than beautiful generates a mild reaction compared to that of an owner to any criticism of his marque of boat. Try mentioning YM's cogent comparison of a Bavaria vs a Contessa 32 (the Contessa was judged superior) to see what I mean.

Unlike some, I have read the MAIB report and am certain the Farr design met all the requirement criteria that Beneteau stipulated. What I was left with was concern over controlling a production technique that applies "gloop" to a surface with critical surface preparation and curing times while not generating any stress raisers and that the resulting bond is not subject to, or easily capable of, inspection. I saw no mention made of failure mode analysis though I am sure this would have been carried out.
The report quoted anecdotal evidence of other 40.7 problems, posters quote similar evidence from other marques. The difference is that the keel problems did not lead to sinkings and/or death (apart from a Bavaria 42 - there may be others).

[smug]I'm just glad my boat is not constructed that way[/smug]

 

[lw395]

.......[smug]I'm just glad my boat is not constructed that way[/smug]

I'm not convinced that other construction methods don't have equal, but different problems.
The design brief is to design something down to a competitive racing weight, then sell good numbers of them, which implies sensible costs.

The boat in question had a long, hard life of intense use, and at least one major repair.
In many senses it could have been considered at the end of its working life.
Then it was used, at best, at the extreme of what it was designed for.

If you ask someone to design you a production inshore/offshore cruiser racer, then the Bene is the kind of thing you get.
If you ask for an ocean racer, you better have deep pockets and limited expectations of performance around the cans.

But I think even the round the world 'Challenge' boats get pretty serious surveys between races.

 

[dom]

But I think even the round the world 'Challenge' boats get pretty serious surveys between races.

That's the key; if you are going to sweat an asset hard you need to maintain it properly - same principle apples in civil aviation, other forms of transportation and a thousand other industrial applications one can think of. Keep bashing something, don't maintain it properly and it eventually breaks, no surprise there!