Suggestions - Lifting keeler, approx 28ft, sub £15K

Neal,

the boat was shabby and falling apart, and I mean bulkheads, all of the interior seemed very lightly built and likely to squeak if prodded !

The chart table was a very strange affair, a sort of knee high platform in place of a quarter berth.

The coachroof and decks had a lot of star cracks; maybe it had been through a dozen transats & Fastnets without maintainence, but let's say I was underwhelmed.
Absolute nonsense. You really are overflowing with urea compounds.
 
And all the larger boats mentioned have relatively light lifting keels, recoursing to fixed ballast stubs.

You keep regurgitating this "Andy Babble" that all lift keelers over 22 foot are an engineering compromise try this for size........

http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/parker-325/parker-325.htm


Yet again you spout utter rubbish.....

No compromise here all the lead where it should be and with a lead wing quite happy to sit on a little sharp stone or two.
http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives/parker-325/parker-325.htm

Nothing wrong with a decent shallow draft stub at least this boat can stand up on sand without falling over! But you cant or wont try that!

http://www.blackrockyachting.co.uk/...xterior/boat-379_exterieur_20111027154406.jpg
 
IIRC the first large racing yacht that had a fully lifting keel was Quiver V. She had a hydraulic lifting keel and swing rudder, was about 40 feet long and there was a photograph published in Yachting World of her aground off the IoW in the early 1970's. Recently Southerly produced large lifting keel boats (I am ignoring centreplate boats) which were even longer. So it is technically possible for lifting keel boats of over 25 ft to be built. They are expensive, but in modern commercial production boats, far too expensive and complex for their selling price points.
 
Sensible lift keels become difficult to engineer affordably above about 24-25'.
What a load of nonsense! Perhaps you should open your eyes a bit and look at all the well engineered lift keel boats designed and built in the US in the 1950-s to 80s for ocean racing under the CCA rules.

Pity you world revolves around obsolete fringe boats that do not reflect the big wide world the rest of us inhabit.
 
Neal,

the boat was shabby and falling apart, and I mean bulkheads, all of the interior seemed very lightly built and likely to squeak if prodded !

The chart table was a very strange affair, a sort of knee high platform in place of a quarter berth.

The coachroof and decks had a lot of star cracks; maybe it had been through a dozen transats & Fastnets without maintainence, but let's say I was underwhelmed.

A boat being shabby relates to the maintenance rather than the build. An Oyster or Swan can be shabby.

The interiors of the Evolutions I've been on have been built from hardwood faced marine ply of 3/8, 1/2 and 3/4 inch thickness and good quality judging by how well the veneers were ageing. Ours didn't squeak.

Ours had one star crack in the gelcoat of the relatively thin monolithic coach roof side in front of the saloon windows which judging by the small indentation at the centre of it had been caused by an impact. The cockpit locker lid also had some minor gel cracks radiating from the hinge fixing holes from where the lid had been leant on when open and pushed too far back, straining the hinge attachments.

Evo 25s don't have a chart table where there should be a quarter berth. They have a quarter berth in the port quarter, the galley with cockpit locker behind in the starboard quarter. The chart table hinges down from the main bulkhead, to port of the keel box.

Are you sure it was actually an Evolution 25 you were looking at? It doesn't sound much like it.
 
Simon,

that's what it was advertised as, and probably written on it somewhere, plus I do know what they look like...

I don't remember if they were available as kits which might explain a non standard fit-out ?

Such things happen I know; Andersons, even the kits, always had the main bulkhead and keel structure fitted even at the most basic level; but I know of one in Cornwall ( fortunately not used AFAIK ) with bulkheads made from vertical strips of house floorboards and a completely non-standard keel I'd guess about 1/10th the weight & 1/2 the depth of the standard boat...

Yes I put a warning on the website about it, not much else one can do.

As for people who weren't there at the Evolution 25 saying they know better than I looking with my own eyes :rolleyes: - I doubt I bothered taking pics as I'd quickly decided I was not keen...
 
Maybe a home finished one then, although I wasn't aware that any were sold in kit form.

If you, or anyone else for that matter, wants a proper under the skin look at a 'factory' built Evolution 25, here is one which is about as warts and all as it's possible to get.

I had a good long look at the boat before taking it on and an even longer one before committing to the amount of work we did, which you can bet your bottom dollar I wouldn't have done on a boat I had any doubts about.

Unfortunately, Photobucket has moved one or two of the photos out of date sequence and won't put them back despite me reordering them, but they're in roughly chronological order from pre-purchase to in commission post refit.

http://smg.photobucket.com/user/syllogismcheck/slideshow/Trifle an Evolution 25
 
Last edited:
NickC,

going back to your original list, forget the Dehler for a start if you want room for 2 couples.

Having a bit protruding from the bottom with the keel raised - be it a ballast bulb like my boat or a ballast stub like a Seal28 does not mean ' it won't dry out '.

My A22 and a Seal 28 when there dried out far more upright than the twin keelers on the soft mud; and if it's not soft mud you don't want a mooring on it or to be temporarily drying in anything but millpond conditions.

Fully retracting keels despite protests from some here mean the hull is horribly vulnerable to any sharp stone or other junk on the seabed.
 
Top