October 22 Yachting Monthly

[Ink]

Idly perusing this month's edition I read the article reviewing the HR 340. Then I came to Ben Sutcliffe-Davies' Expert Opinion. The last sentence had me startled to say the least.

"Make sure you check seacocks as anything over five years old is best replaced".

Now bearing in mind that this is in a Hallberg- Rassy where I have always been led to believe that it was overall a quality product, this surely is nothing other than scaremongering.

Ink

 

[Tranona]

That particular "surveyor" is always getting things wrong, particularly to do with seacocks and materials. Been pointed out to YM/him several times, including published letters from both myself and Vyv Cox.

 

[RivalRedwing]

He must work for the current owners of Blakes

 

[Poignard]

"...anything over five years old is best replaced "

I don't see how such an arbitrary statement can be justified without supporting evidence.

I have three Blakes 1-1/2" seacocks (price £196.63 each) on my boat and two 3/4" ones (price £160.26 each).*

That means every five years I would have to spend £910.41 on replacing seacocks (assuming I fitted Blakes).

That's about £15 a month every month while I own the boat.

I'd need some convincing before saddling myself with that outlay.


*Blakes Seacocks

 

[jwilson]

HR fit brass seacocks and skin fittings, not Blakes. So do most other production builders - Jeanneau, Beneteau, Bavaria, Dufour etc. They complied with the RCD that says they must be designed to last for at least 5 years.

As a purely precautionary measure I changed all my brass seacocks and skin fittings on a Jeanneau at 10 years from new, for bronze. The only parts that showed signs of dezincification were a couple of the hose tails, which were clearly of an different and inferior metal and quite brittle. If I was doing it again, which I certainly now don't plan to do any time soon, I'd use DZR at a third of the cost of bronze.

 

[xcw]

I have a 7 year old Bavaria and one of my sea cocks started to leak and upon closer inspection it was VERY close to catastrophic failure - I dread to think what the consequences would have been if it had failed at sea. After further research, it is commonly advised to replace after 5 years. If you don't replace after 5 years I strongly recommend you inspect them very closely

 

[lustyd]

I have three Blakes 1-1/2" seacocks (price £196.63 each) on my boat and two 3/4" ones (price £160.26 each).*

That means every five years I would have to spend £910.41 on replacing seacocks (assuming I fitted Blakes).

Compared to maintenance free TruDesign at £56 for the 1-1/2" I can't see how that extra expense would be justified these days

 

[Poignard]

Compared to maintenance free TruDesign at £56 for the 1-1/2" I can't see how that extra expense would be justified these days

That expense doesn't need to be justified because I won't be incurring it!

 

[lustyd]

That expense doesn't need be justified because I won't be incurring it!

I wasn't suggesting you would. I was just pointing out that those prices are absurdly high, given the more modern competition at significantly lower cost.

 

[SaltyC]

Perhaps those who keep claiming the B word keeps giving, need to consider a regime run by paper shufflers with no technical Understanding making rules for mass producers to reduce costs producing unsafe vessels?

One of whom has stated yachts should have a design life of 10 years - then scrap!!!

 

[Neeves]

It would certainly free up mooring space if yachts were scrapped at 10 years. You might reduce the yachts moored by 50% in some locations. Few yachts under 10 years are kept on swing moorings, most are in marinas.

It would also decimate income from moorings - there might be some disagreement to the idea (of scrap at 10 years) from some surprising quarters.

Jonathan

 

[lustyd]

I’ve been thinking that too. Boat building is currently unsustainable as the marinas are all becoming full. It’s already hard to use a boat to go anywhere as destinations are also full and this will only get worse as we add more boats. 10 years is obviously a bit drastic but it’s a problem that needs to be addressed sooner or later.

 

[LONG_KEELER]

No disrespect to Accountants as a whole, but many companies are stacked to be run by them now and they are under lots of pressure. Past reputations don't mean too much these days. What's important is the share price.

This is extremely frustrating for people who have been around for many years and have to put products together.

 

[Frogmogman]

Perhaps those who keep claiming the B word keeps giving, need to consider a regime run by paper shufflers with no technical

Yawn.

I shall resist rising to your bait.

Should I list the regulations that the government actually wishes to scrap, I’d be accused of being political.

 

[Tranona]

No disrespect to Accountants as a whole, but many companies are stacked to be run by them now and they are under lots of pressure. Past reputations don't mean too much these days. What's important is the share price.

Fitting brass seacocks is nothing new - see post#5. European builders have been doing it for years, long predating the RCD, and not done for cost reasons, but simply because that was what was available and proven satisfactory in service. There are literally millions of such things in service (think about it, many boats have 10 seacocks - even my simple one has 5) and yet no reports of mass sinkings!

That is not to say they should not be inspected regularly, but the chances of failure even from dezincification in skin fittings and hose tails is small. Now DZR for both valves and fittings is widely available it is sensible to use this for replacements.

 

[RivalRedwing]

Compared to maintenance free TruDesign at £56 for the 1-1/2" I can't see how that extra expense would be justified these days

45 years since installation and still going strong... so, taking the long view that is £4.35 per year at Poignard's prices.... the price difference for the item starts to becomes almost immaterial.

 

[SaltyC]

It would certainly free up mooring space if yachts were scrapped at 10 years. You might reduce the yachts moored by 50% in some locations. Few yachts under 10 years are kept on swing moorings, most are in marinas.

It would also decimate income from moorings - there might be some disagreement to the idea (of scrap at 10 years) from some surprising quarters.

Jonathan

Agreed re freeing up moorings and decimating income from them since depreciation of 10% of list price / year would deter many due to affordability and many would not be able to sail on a 'shoestring'.

 

[lustyd]

45 years since installation and still going strong... so, taking the long view that is £4.35 per year at Poignard's prices.... the price difference for the item starts to becomes almost immaterial.

But then there are composite ones which have been in use for 20 years and with zero maintenance are still in perfect condition. The point remains, there is a cheaper, lower maintenance option out there and metal fittings are outdated and overpriced.

 

[Boathook]

One of whom has stated yachts should have a design life of 10 years - then scrap!!!

If we applied that to the Royal Navy we would only have about 2 ships ....

My boat is around 46 years young so using 10 years I would be halfway through the lifespan of my 5th boat ....

 

[Sandy]

Why anybody fits metal through hulls and sea cocks is beyond my understanding.