AndrewB
Well-Known Member
Curious, can you say why? I've used Fertan as a rust killer and found it reasonably effective.
Steelboats
- Thread starter Wansworth
- Start date
- Status
Wansworth
Well-Known Member
Fertan was suggested by the builder as a cheaper alternative to shot blasting .I found after about five years especially on the deck I needed to stat again with the painting in a big way so de iced to shot blast and repaint.
KellysEye
Well-Known Member
>No heavy displacement boats of any material are heavy displacement.
Heavy and Ultra-Heavy Displacement Hulls
With Displacement/Length ratios of 360 plus, ultra-heavy displacement hull styles have fewer devotees these days, though for passionate cruising traditionalists it's de rigueur. Heavy displacement sailboats of this type will have a full (or long) keel, which will bring with it some benefits - and some significant limitations.
The difference is GRP boats have a fin keel and heavy displacement boats have a long keel or long keel with cutaway forefoot, ours was filled with lead. Fully loaded our 38 foot steel ketch weighed 15 tons.
Heavy and Ultra-Heavy Displacement Hulls
With Displacement/Length ratios of 360 plus, ultra-heavy displacement hull styles have fewer devotees these days, though for passionate cruising traditionalists it's de rigueur. Heavy displacement sailboats of this type will have a full (or long) keel, which will bring with it some benefits - and some significant limitations.
The difference is GRP boats have a fin keel and heavy displacement boats have a long keel or long keel with cutaway forefoot, ours was filled with lead. Fully loaded our 38 foot steel ketch weighed 15 tons.
Tranona
Well-Known Member
Once again a bit of nonsense. You really do seem to have no understanding of the subject. There are many long keel heavy displacement boats with GRP hulls and lead keels, mostly built in the 1960s to 1990s and some are still built today. There are also heavy displacement boats with fin keels and steel boats with fin keels.
While heavy displacement long keel boats are popular with some long distance cruisers, they are in a minority as very few have been built in the last 30 years so anybody wanting to go long distance sailing with a boat built since about 1990 will almost certainly have to buy a fin keel boat.
So your statement about the "difference" is just not supported by the evidence.
Wansworth
Well-Known Member
In say a 15 ton 40 footer a steel boat wil have more of its weight distributed through out the hull with maybe only 3 or 4 tons of ballast in the keel ,whereas maybe a grp boat of the same displacement will have more weight in the keel and in that way behave differently.
KellysEye
Well-Known Member
>No heavy displacement boats of any material are heavy displacement.
>> There are many long keel heavy displacement boats with GRP hulls and lead keels, mostly built in the 1960s to 1990s and some are still built today. There are also heavy displacement boats with fin keels and steel boats with fin keels.
So in your previous view there are no heavy displacement boats but now there are.
>> There are many long keel heavy displacement boats with GRP hulls and lead keels, mostly built in the 1960s to 1990s and some are still built today. There are also heavy displacement boats with fin keels and steel boats with fin keels.
So in your previous view there are no heavy displacement boats but now there are.
Tranona
Well-Known Member
First PLEASE use the "Reply with Quotes" function because I do not understand the point you are trying to make. What you write does not connect with anything because you have just preceded it with random sentences. If you use the proper function then it shows exactly what the original post says, who said it and your response so the reader has a chance of understanding your comment. I have no idea how you can say what is in your post as nowhere have I (nor anyone else) said "there are no heavy displacement boats" - so who and what are you replying to?
There is no point in trying to enter into any discourse with you until you are able to follow forum conventions and express clearly what you want to communicate.
john_morris_uk
Well-Known Member
A fifteen tonne boat with only 3 or four tonnes in the keel doesn't sound like its within the normal ratio for an ocean going cruising boat. I appreciate that stability comes from form and ballast, but that ratio is a little on the low side by most people's standards and expectations.
ergo your comment that it will behave differently would be certainly true, but I suspect that the owner would be less than happy with the performance and comfort of said boat.
Wansworth
Well-Known Member
I think you will find that many oldish cruising boats aka Hillyards maybe only had 33% ballast ratio.The higher ratios made for boats quick to right but not so comfortable I don’t have any data but an all time classic cruising boat was the Spray and she didn’t have a very high ballast ranting and my steel cruising boat designed by Alan Pape had 33% relying on form stability instead of a lump of ballast on the end of a keel
geem
Well-Known Member
My Van de Stadt was designed in 1977. The design weight is 14.5 tonnes with 6 tonnes of lead in the keel. She has a fin and skeg hull with 2.2m draft. She is made of GRP. She has a theoretical 41% ballast ratio but with inevitable stores onboard that is not the same in the real world. We normally hit the scales at +18t. She never rounds up when sailing. She is fast when compared to other more modern yacht being used as liveaboards here in the Caribbean. Even loaded up she sits above her designers original marks as she was designed for living aboard. We see a few steel boats here in the Caribbean but not many. They are not that popular and they all seem to be slow. Of the few we have come across on-route, we sail right past even when they are longer than us. There seem to be few really good designs of steel boat. I guess if there were there would be a lot more of them. They might be good when you hit a reef but I can think of no other benifits of steel. I suspect I am not alone with this view or there would be a lot more steel boats about. There is enough to do to keep a liveaboard boat in good condition without the added headache of terminal corrosion.
rotrax
Well-Known Member
I have exactly the same sentiments, backed up by the direct experience of currently owning both a steel and a GRP yacht.
I have no doubt whatsoever-as you have clearly " attacked " steel yachts-that Brent will be along shortly to put us both right..............................................
SlowlyButSurely
Well-Known Member
So why on earth did you buy a steel boat?
rotrax
Well-Known Member
Because it was a real bargain.
Made from Corten Steel to a Hartley design by a very good welder, fitted out nicely with a sensible interior it was fully equipped and had been used as a liveaboard. First Mate and I day sail it when we are in NZ. When we return in November we shall have it lifted, antifouled, do a bit of cosmetic work and replace the windows.
Then, work done, the Marlborough Sounds!
At the exchange rate at the time-2014- it cost £4,000. It had an inflatable and outboard, liferaft and epirb, microwave, cooker, califont and electric heads. Spinnaker, four headsails, roller boom reefing, lots of cordage, solar power and a gas barbie on the rail.
Not bad for a fully equipped 32 foot yacht. After cleaning-that took a week-we lived aboard in the Marina for six weeks and day sailed regularly.
Now the boat is reliable and well set up, it is a cheap toy and a very usefull fishing platform.
The window apetures are rusting, as is the transom where the cockpit drains from through the gas locker. The forward hatch leaks in one corner.
When these issues are addressed in November/December this year she will be well up together-and for not much money.
For 4 months playtime every year, four thousand pounds was the right money, warts and all!
Last edited:
KellysEye
Well-Known Member
>First PLEASE use the "Reply with Quotes" function because I do not understand the point you are trying to make. What you write does not connect with anything because you have just preceded it with random sentences. . I have no idea how you can say what is in your post as nowhere have I (nor anyone else) said "there are no heavy displacement boats" - so who and what are you replying to?
I think posting a whole post is waste of space, > was used when the Internet and Web first came into existence and nobody complained then. All you need is the key point/s to answer a post, as above. There are two posters who wrongly said there are no heavy displacement boats Motor_Sailor and Peter Cooper look through the thread and you will see that, I am surprised you missed them.
I think posting a whole post is waste of space, > was used when the Internet and Web first came into existence and nobody complained then. All you need is the key point/s to answer a post, as above. There are two posters who wrongly said there are no heavy displacement boats Motor_Sailor and Peter Cooper look through the thread and you will see that, I am surprised you missed them.
Biggles Wader
Well-Known Member
No. Neither of them said that which would be obvious if you quoted their posts properly and in full so as to comprehend the meaning. You are either trolling because that is what you do or you are deliberately misinterpreting others so as to cover up the ludicrous statement you originally made in a vain attempt to avoid looking foolish.
Tranona
Well-Known Member
So why are you using an old protocol that nobody else uses. Man used to carve signs on cave walls but we no longer do that.
SO USE THE CORRECT PROTOCOL to avoid misunderstanding.
The protocol also means that if you are responding to a specific point made by one poster you quote from his post, editing it to remove what is not relevant to your point. You do not have to repeat the whole post - that is what the edit function is for.
I have no idea from your post who you were referring to so this just adds to the confusion.
If you want to be taken seriously then follow the protocols and clearly explain the point you are trying to make.
Nobody else seems to have the same difficulty as you.
I did not miss anything. Neither of the posters said what you claim they said, so did you just make it up? Seems you also need to read and understand what other people write.
PeteCooper
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you would be good enough to show me where I said that there are no heavy displacement boats?
I merely pointed out that your knowledge of boat design is completely wrong and gave a couple of examples to prove it.
PeteCooper
Well-Known Member
I should also say that in the early days of the internet people would always send the minimum number of characters because disk space was very expensive and line speeds were very slow.
Things have moved on considerably since then as have procedures on forums.
SlowlyButSurely
Well-Known Member
So you have an excellent blue water cruising boat ready to go for 4k. Many people have ended up owning a steel boat this way when they discover you can get a lot of boat very economically because of many people's fear of rust.
Many of the advantages of steel are not apparent until you go cruising off the beaten track. For example, I met a man last year whose grp boat was being lifted into its cradle and one of the pads was misaligned resulting in a crack in the hull which took a month to get repaired. If you are living aboard this is a serious inconvenience. This kind of thing just doesn't happen with a steel boat.
rotrax
Well-Known Member
No. Not a cruising boat for First Mate and I.
It requires shore power to work the fridge, its really only a powered coolbox on 12v. It is slow, turns and tacks slowly and has vertical steps to access the accommodation, a small cockpit with tiller steering and no autopilot. It is underpowered with a Bukh DV20.
Compared to our GRP motorsailer it is not in the same league. By comparison it is camping on water.
All the shortcomings could be addressed with time and money, but First Mate and I have physical shortcomings due to worn out bodies which mean that our GRP boat, an Island Packet SP Cruiser fitted with an 8KW Genset and extra 40 litre freezer compartment, walk round bed and easy on/off when alongside is the ideal boat for us.
Apart from the rust mentioned earlier, the Hartley is fine. Dry inside, all internal surfaces were covered with what appears to be black bitumastic paint after build in 1986. The bilge only gets a bit of rainwater from the leaky front hatch. It is basically a sound, simple and strong boat, but I dont think we shall be going blue water in her.
I have agreed with Brent that what you state about the suitability of steel for off the beaten track cruising is correct.
He, however, continues with his inverse snobbery that is founded on the premise that " If it aint steel its crap! "
The keel cant come off our GRP boat, it is heavy, has huge water and fuel tanks, all the bells and whistles and is by far the best compromise First Mate and I could find to suit our specific requirements.
It just cost too much-but I would say that, would I not...................................
- Status