Which deck finishing makes the boat look nicer?

Which deck finishing makes the boat look nicer?

  • Total voters
    47
MapisM said:
The debate on another thread made me curious to check what the asylum members think of these two alternatives.
As we all know, there are several differences also from a functional standpoint between teak and bare GRP, but the question here is strictly focused on aesthetic.
So, over to you guys, what alternative do you like better?
iIHGLxAU_o.jpg
Click to expand...
I was looking at your photos when your boat glided past me in the Port of Porquerolle and she looked very nice. After lunch I took a walk down to her, she is Feretti Craft Altura 52S, I assume a corporate change rather than a design change. She was in a flawless state with teak decks.
Now I like teak, especially the intricacies in a high end finish and I also like teak capping. What is the old saying, if a boat designer built the Space Shuttle it would have a teak deck. But if, when you look at teak, all you see is the stains, the cost, the maintenance schedule then that will cloud your judgment. So the real question you should have asked is:
Should I take an angle grinder to the big stainless steel loop on the bow?
 
From the visual point of view - teak
From the practical point of view - grp

I hear what people say about the ease of keeping teak clean but for me, its always going to be easier to keep grp clean than teak. Also the big downside of teak for me in the Med is how hot it gets underfoot. I can imagine that on a scorching Med day whoever has to handle the lazy lines when mooring might be complaining. So on balance its grp for me
 
Naturally bleached teak in the cockpit and swim platform for me, and non-slip GRP everywhere else. That's enough maintenance for me, a boat is to be used, it's not a Faberge egg! I too would take an angle grinder to that tall s/s thing on the bow, it looks odd. My anchor ball gets hung as high as poss, well above the radar dome so it's visible against the sky. As a UK S Coast boater, I don't get the Med thing I've seen in pics on here, where the anchor ball is fixed relatively low down at the bow. Sorry for Fred Drift but if I'm missing the point please enlighten me!
 
BruceK said:
What is that arch on the bow rails for? I've wanted to know for a long time.
Click to expand...
Simple, it's there because there's no headstay on a mobo.
Where else could you fly a decent size Lion of Saint Mark flag?
Of course you are free to argue with Venetians about that - at your own risk, that is! :D
IMG_20171009_131227_7511-1024x840.jpg
 
Well maintained teak looks great but in reality it is an absolute pain IMHO and unless you dedicate your life to it (or have crew) and wear slippers every time you walk on it then it is difficult to keep looking good. Our Broom had top quality teak all round the deck and whilst in the early days I took pleasure in admiring how it looked that soon wore off as I battled to keep it looking something like reasonable.

Next boat, whatever that might be, will not have teak apart from maybe the cockpit but that is only because to exclude that will make it very difficult to find anything :)

So to answer the original question, well kept teak looks better than GRP but for many it won’t be well kept and it then starts to look a bit grim.
 
MapisM, I’m sure you realize that what I said about the big loop was just me making a joke:cool:
But from now on this is serious, on big boats from before the 90s the external exhausts was a prominent feature (or are they air intakes, i don’t actually know). I think they look good and make the boat look faster, as they do on a car. That was until i was moored next to one, he fendered the pipes and for safety so have I, but they are a clear gel cote hazard to me and an extra nuisance for my manœuvring. It also occurred to me that if he ever left (luckily he never does) then on his return he could take out some gouges on our very tight mooring. Poll: should they be banned
 
Bouba said:
.......... big boats from before the 90s the external exhausts was a prominent feature (or are they air intakes, i don’t actually know). I think they look good and make the boat look faster, as they do on a car. ..........
Click to expand...

You mean like the picture below :) ???

... and we have additional air intakes in the superstructure .... so all have some sort of function ...

The exhausts;
Exit from engine room directly and the exhaust ducts actually does give lift underway ..., but require some more attention when fendering off...

The intakes;
The aft cluster is connected to blowers, the others are intakes ... and as the larger engines usually were two stroke diesels, they actually need twice the amount of air of a four stroke of same swung volume at given RPM ... each stroke is an air intake, compression and ignition stroke with exhaust gases being expelled during the downward part of the stroke through over pressure in an air box that forces air into the cylinder in preparation for the compression/combustion stroke again.

So the design features you refer to usually did/does have a function ....
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0005_1.jpg
    IMG_0005_1.jpg
    69.5 KB · Views: 1
Yes Divemaster1, that’s exactly it. If they were closer to the bow, under the sheer of the hull, no problem. But by the stern, where the hull is upright (as is their neighbors in Med style berthing) they are a hazard
 
Mario Amarti was the 1st boat builder to do away with side pod exhaust s ,in the early 80.s
Primarily for noise reduction he basically invented underwater exhausts ,
There’s a bit of liaison necessary with the intricacies with the engine builder too ,to get the correct back pressure range .
So they tend to have fart pipe at the stern to take care of low rpm and you can eyeball reassuringly water exiting as well .
The concept has since been replicated by the rest of the field .
 
Portofino said:
Mario Amarti was the 1st boat builder to do away with side pod exhaust s ,in the early 80.s
Primarily for noise reduction he basically invented underwater exhausts ,
There’s a bit of liaison necessary with the intricacies with the engine builder too ,to get the correct back pressure range .
So they tend to have fart pipe at the stern to take care of low rpm and you can eyeball reassuringly water exiting as well .
The concept has since been replicated by the rest of the field .
Click to expand...

And you can cultivate oysters in the submerged outlet
 
NoviceRod said:
And you can cultivate oysters in the submerged outlet
Click to expand...

Well I have not seen any - yet
Any how some pics
https://imgur.com/gallery/22o1C

Forgot to mention another functionality if do it a certain way with a deep V .
Something along the lines of using the gas to flow out and reduce drag ?
Not sure how but I suspect some sort of performance advantage to run the gasses 12 L @2000 rpm under part of the hull behind .??
 
Last edited:
Portofino said:
Any how some pics
https://imgur.com/gallery/22o1C
Click to expand...
'Dunno if you have anything to see with the other pages which can be seen by clicking "Next Post", but I must say that some are funny.
Surely more entertaining than boat exhaust systems! :D

Anyhow, ref the added bonus of u/w exhausts, on paper there are two, both of them applicable to any planing boat btw - as long as they are on the plane, but regardless of how deep their deadrise is:
1) ventilation of the external stern section of the hull, which reduces the wet surface, hence drag;
2) scavenging effect on exhaust fumes, hence getting rid of backpressure.

BUT, I wouldn't hold my breath for the actual relevance of neither, particularly at human cruising speeds.
I suppose that the better hull ventilation MIGHT be worth a bit more speed on VERY fast boats, say above 50kts or so.
Then again, that sort of boats usually have petrol engines with straight transom exhaust - for good reasons, surely.

Nah, I don't think u/w exhaust would make any sense, if it weren't for noise reduction.
 
Divemaster1 said:
So the design features you refer to usually did/does have a function ....
Click to expand...
Yep, all agreed.
I don't think it was a primary objective of this design, but it also helped limiting the boat roll by extending the dynamic buoyancy over a larger width, particularly at D speed and/or during the D to P speed transition (a situation in which some old heavy-ish and underpowered hulls used to struggle a bit).
 
Bouba said:
MapisM, I’m sure you realize that what I said about the big loop was just me making a joke :cool:
Click to expand...
'course I do, as I'm sure you did with my suggestion that the steel loop is only meant to fly the Venetian flag!
Actually, it's not just for the anchor ball as was mentioned, but also for overall safety, giving a solid handle to grab to whenever doing anything at the bow.
Think about anchor handling, mooring lines, keep an eye forward to sea bottom, for instance. Or just stay there while enjoying the ride, possibly together with Kate Winslet... :cool:
Not to mention (Titanic sprung emergencies to mind!) deploying a floating anchor while drifting in rough waters.
Itama flush foredecks are more elegant for good, but in an event like that, I know on which boat I'd rather try the maneuver! :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top