Rustler 31... known issues?

[KevO]

Some forumites will know I have been looking for a new boat. In the course of my deliberations I have been sniffing around Rustler 31s. Looked at one yesterday which was hanging... In rag order throughout but nevertheless the very hopeful vendor wanted 12+k for. The list of probs is extensive and very expensive to sort out, in particular the coachroof at the mast step was quite deformed and would need a lot of work. Seems someone has put a very substantial wooden pillar in the cabin in the past but this is no longer doing anything useful at all. I suspect that the coachroof is collapsing in on itself... like It's internal structure has collapsed. Is this a known problem with early rustlers? I haven't seen a similar compression post installation on other similar examples.

Another I am sniffing at has an issue that requires retabbing of the main bulkhead and some of the other fixtures too. Again, is this a known issue with old 31s that can be sorted in a straightforward manner or should I avoid like the plague?

 

[Tranona]

Common on boats of that era where the chain plates are attached to a rigid structure (the hull) and the deck/coachroof is not strong enough on its own to take the compression loads without a post to the keel. Unfortunately such a post usually restricts access into the forecabin so instead the moulding and the bulkheads take the load. There maybe a beam of some sort in the coachroof to transmit the load to the bulkhead, but it is either inadequate or is softwood and rotted. Constantly tensioning the rigging slowly pushes the coachroof down.

The solution is to take the mast off, jack the coachroof back into shape and either put in a compression post or build in a beam and posts either side of the opening down to a floor across the keel. There are many different ways of achieving this which will depend on the exact build of the boat and whether you want it invisible or happy to see the reinforcement exposed.

Scottytradewind, who posts here did the job on his Twister (very similar construction) and has drawings and photos of his solution.

Hope this helps.

 

[Spyro]

Have you seen this on the one at Clyde Marina?

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

There is a very good Rustler 31 owners association.

 

[Twister_Ken]

If it was the same construction as the Twister (same designer, same era, 3 feet shorter) then there are two bulkheads with arched doorways, one at aft end of forecabin, one at fore end of saloon. Between will be heads, hanging locker, etc. The mast steps onto a rigid shoe at deck level which bears onto both bulkheads to support the mast very adequately. This R31 pic shows the set-up below decks.

Sounds like the one you're looking at had a different arrangement (home build?)

 

[bromleybysea]

Rustler 31s were completed by a number of builders and a lot were fitted out by amateurs to inevitably varied standards. My Rustler 31 has a very substantial compression post under the mast that transfers the thrust of the mast to the keel, and this post is also integral to one of the two transverse bulkheads either side of the heads- it’s a very strong arrangement. I would walk away from a boat that did not have adequate support under the mast. It is the case that the webs that the chain plates are bolted through can separate from the hull, though this is usually fairly easy to rectify. I’ve had my Rustler for over 20 years and I’m not aware of any inherent structural issues if they were well-built in the first place. Structurally, it’s hard to envisage a more bullet-proof arrangement than a integral encapsulated keel with a full depth rudder hung on the back.

BTW, the picture above, if it is of a Rustler 31, is not of a mast compression post as it's far to far forward in the boat- I think it might be a tube for the anchor chain.

If you like the long-keel heavy displacement classic 60s cruiser-racer style then the Rustler is a lovely boat, but you certainly don’t get the accommodation that comes with more modern designs. What you do get is superb sea-keeping and a relatively comfortable and forgiving motion under way. You also have endless fun trying to go backwards under power!

 

[V1701]

Is it this one?

 

[Tranona]

If it is the one in the ad then looks like there is an inner and outer moulding and it could be that the reinforcing between the two has collapsed. You may well find that the load is supposed to be spread across the two bulkheads with a fore and aft pad that locates on the bulkheads. The mast step is only the size of the mast foot and would probably be better if it were extended to cover the whole area between the bulkheads.

 

[KevO]

djbreeze, yes that is the one I looked at in Cornwall. It was in a disgusting state inside with water up to floor level, batteries completely submerged in thick, fithy, slimy water, lots of corrosion arising from the batteries being soaked for a long time I assume.... It looked like someone had emptied a food waste bin into the water and put the floor boards back down. Chemistry and biology allowed to run riot! Gross! Been put ashore and just left to deteriorate for a couple of years I believe. A shame to see what was once a well-known and loved example being left like that.

Significant deformation around the base of the mast like I said. A very hefty compression post installed inside that didn't even appear to be in contact with the deckhead head lining as far as I could tell. 'The compression post repair needs redoing' said the survey. I think the composition of the coachroof itself is collapsing internally... ie the sandwich layer between the outer and inner layers has broken down, so building up the height of the compression post alone is not going to do anything about the softness and subsidence.

There was also an area mirrored on both the port and starboard bow quarters that showed localised crazing (10" x 8") about 6-8" above the boot top. I gather some other Rustler owners noticed the same thing and had to undertake significant repairs and reinforcement in the forepeak.

Needs the engine ripping out and reconditioning or replacing... it looked like one big lump of rust. The interior woodwork and wiring needs complete renovation by the look of it. Obvious problems with the shroud fixings on the port side too. Topsides need complete renovation and painting too once the bow area problem is investigated and rectified.

Anyway.... I think it's a project boat that is certainly recoverable but that will require lots of time and an open cheque book invested to bring it back to life. I suspect once you started down that road you would soon find a whole encyclopaedia of jobs that need doing. Broker said with a straight face "the price reflects it's condition, after all it's a 30 grand boat." I wouldn't pay more than 6k for it, if that... there are much better examples out there that have already been re-engined and much better maintained. If it gets left much longer it'll be a 'pay someone to take it away' job...

 

[prv]

Is it this one?

djbreeze, yes that is the one I looked at in Cornwall. It was in a disgusting state inside with water up to floor level, batteries completely submerged in thick, fithy, slimy water, lots of corrosion arising from the batteries being soaked for a long time I assume.... It looked like someone had emptied a food waste bin into the water and put the floor boards back down. Chemistry and biology allowed to run riot! Gross! Been put ashore and just left to deteriorate for a couple of years I believe. A shame to see what was once a well-known and loved example being left like that.

In that case, that's one hell of a misleading advert!

Pete

 

[Spyro]

BTW, the picture above, if it is of a Rustler 31, is not of a mast compression post as it's far to far forward in the boat- I think it might be a tube for the anchor chain.

!

It is indeed.

 

[Tranona]

In that case, that's one hell of a misleading advert!

Pete

Yes, classic example of the owner wanting to remember it "when it was".

Agree asking price way too much and a real money pit. Ridiculous to say it is a "£30k boat" - even the best don't go for that kind of money, and that amount would easily disappear if you tried to get it up to a high standard.

 

[KevO]

I took an old friend along with me to get an independant opinion. He has owned a number of classics for over 40 years and actually rebuilt a Nic 36 that had sat in a farmer's field for 8 years so has quite a lot of experience. I have known him for over 30 years... The first time I have seen him speechless was we went below and I lifted the floors I wish I had not been so distracted that I had taken a bunch of pictures myself. Actually, my mate's SWMBO might have taken some, I'll ask her.

To be honest, I think the broker himself was quite shocked and he must have spent 10 minutes trying to pump it all out... unsuccessfully, given the sludge content.

Anyway, the photos in the advert must have been taken back in her heyday... the doesn't look anything like that now. I expected the exterior to be a bit green and dirty, I didn't expect the rest having trusted the photos on the advert.

Edit: She had taken some pics of the exterior which don't look too bad... she refused to come down inside when she saw it though.

Oh... and she reminded me a quite a few of the ali window frames are badly corroded and would need ripping out and replacing too.

 

[Babylon]

Anyway, the photos in the advert must have been taken back in her heyday... the doesn't look anything like that now. I expected the exterior to be a bit green and dirty, I didn't expect the rest having trusted the photos on the advert.

This sort of blinkered dishonesty really annoys me.

I'd get the broker to reimburse your combined travel costs!

Actually, I'd give the broker a thumping great kick up the arse for having the temerity to list the boat without first giving it a proper inspection, and a second one for not taking a full set of his own photographs.

 

[chinita]

Yes, classic example of the owner wanting to remember it "when it was".

But, if the photographs appeared on the Broker's website, surely the broker assumes the responsibility for their accuracy?

 

[KevO]

Luckily I was in Falmouth visiting my dear old mum anyway so it wasn't a completely wasted trip, but it was a waste of a day. I would have been jumping if I had travelled all that way specifically

 

[Tranona]

But, if the photographs appeared on the Broker's website, surely the broker assumes the responsibility for their accuracy?

At the time I made that comment it was based on the original ad which was a private eBay classified by the owner, with more photos and a detailed description of how wonderful the boat was, and he had owned it since 1995 etc etc.

Only discovered it was also with the broker when I saw Kevo's photos. The broker add actually has no detail and not all the owner's photos, but no recent photos.

 

[chinita]

But even the few photographs the broker has shown display a very nice saloon and the boat underway - is that misrepresentation?

 

[Tmacd]

But, if the photographs appeared on the Broker's website, surely the broker assumes the responsibility for their accuracy?

Morally I think they should, but then they have a disclaimer -

" ******* are acting as brokers for the vendor who is not selling in the course of business unless otherwise stated. These details are prepared from information provided by the vendor and are intended only as a guide to give a fair description of the vessel but their accuracy cannot be guaranteed and they do not constitute part of any contract........"

 

[KevO]

Yes!