Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorAlthough my primary expertise is in wood I do have at least some experience in GRP.
That damage looks to me to be more than cosmetic, and it certainly needs repair; especially the region in the bottom of the photo just right of centre, where it appears to me that there is a complete hole in the outer layer of the laminate, exposing the core. One must assume that the cracks covering the remainder of the photo are similarly deep, at least until such time as it is proved otherwise. Although that hole actually appears to be the result of very local damage to the gunwale, and it may possibly be the case that the cracking elsewhere is unrelated to it, until it has been thoroughly investigated I would assume the worst.
In principle, anything is fixable, but this looks to be more than a trivial job.
If I were tackling the job, and I have done what I think are rather bigger jobs on my yacht, I would grind away all the damaged material, leaving a tapered edge (to provide what in woodwork one would call a scarf joint, with a recommended gradient of 1 in 12). Personally I prefer woven glass reinforcement, whether mat or tape, rather than chopped strand mat, both because I think it is stronger and because I find it easier to ensure full penetration of the reinforcement by the resin. Then coat with epoxy resin, and lay up new epoxy GRP, layer after layer, tapering the repair to match the tapered hole, until you have built up to the original surface contour. Use epoxy, not polyester (it is stronger, and adheres very much better), and use a metal roller to achieve high packing density of the reinforcement in the resin. Your choice whether to finish with gelcoat or with paint.
Use hand protection and eye protection; the latter is particularly important. My information may now be out of date, but back in the seventies (using polyester resin, of course, rather than epoxy, and with the hardener in use at that time) there was serious concern that even the smallest speck of hardener in the eye would cause irreversible and progressive eye damage which could ultimately result in blindness. I would hope that this no longer applies with today’s materials, but I don’t know, and better safe than sorry.
If you are well used to large scale DIY repairs this is not desperately daunting, but if not you may well find it daunting.
The best and most authoritative manual on such repairs is probably the Gougeon Bros. one; https://www.westsystem.com/wp-content/uploads/Fiberglass-Manual-2015.pdf
However the considerable amount of work needed on this boat should be reflected in the price you are prepared to pay. Conversely, if the price is not tempting you may well be able to find a boat in better condition within your budget.
Hope this is of some help.
Oliver
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorGood luck, James; in your bid to win the next Championship you are up against seriously stiff competition at the highest international level.
But you never know … …
Oliver
16/07/2019 at 8:10 pm in reply to: Suitable Varnish For Toerail, rudder, deck handles and deck "V" #18554Oliver Shaw
ModeratorI would use Toplac, but as Norman pointed out you could get away with standard Dulux.
But Toplac will make a nicer job, and hopefully longer lasting.
Oliver
16/07/2019 at 2:03 pm in reply to: Suitable Varnish For Toerail, rudder, deck handles and deck "V" #18549Oliver Shaw
ModeratorI have had a private email from Graham Know, which I post here with his permission.
Oliver
I regularly read the forum but am reluctant to be more directly involved. I just happen to have read the latest post from Robine at Carsington. As it happens I will have known the boat concerned. The number 7468 does indeed relate to Pinta, it’s name when it was at Hollingworth Lake many years ago. I think the date will be 1969/70 as this would tie in with my club records. It is amazing that it is still around and loved! It did once belong to a good friend of mine!
“Regards
“Graham
15/07/2019 at 9:34 pm in reply to: Most cost effective new boom up cover or best way to make your own #18546Oliver Shaw
ModeratorI have just had a look, and I agree. All the ones on offer, for other dinghies as well as GP14s, appear to be reasonable quality rather than el cheapo budget items, but I have seen the latter in the past; indeed a few years ago we bought some for our club Wayfarers.
They certainly used to exist, but they are not what is currently listed, so do keep looking.
Oliver
15/07/2019 at 9:29 pm in reply to: Suitable Varnish For Toerail, rudder, deck handles and deck "V" #18545Oliver Shaw
ModeratorNorman is absolutely right that the varnish won’t damage the hull, but that for purely cosmetic reasons it would be sensible to use masking tape. I had indeed intended to say that, but the thought got waylaid while typing!
From your description of the boat I take it that she has an aft buoyancy tank running across the boat under the stern deck. If so, that fixes her as a Mk.1 boat, which were built from 1967, and effectively superseded by the Mk 2 from 1969.
Oliver
15/07/2019 at 8:05 pm in reply to: Most cost effective new boom up cover or best way to make your own #18540Oliver Shaw
ModeratorSince the boat is GRP the choice of cover is less critical than for a wooden boat.
Given that cost is a factor, you could sensibly consider one of the cheap PVC ones that certainly used to be readily available on eBay. It will do the job, albeit only for a limited period, but it will get you started.
Expect it to last a couple of seasons. Then you can consider switching to a top quality one which will protect better and will also last for many years.
Oliver
15/07/2019 at 8:01 pm in reply to: Suitable Varnish For Toerail, rudder, deck handles and deck "V" #18538Oliver Shaw
ModeratorRobine,
You don’t give a date or a model designation, but from your description I presume this is one of the early GRP boats, somewhere around Mk 1, Mk 2 or Mk 3. With deference to the age of the boat in particular, and the possibility of mating surfaces between the wood and the GRP being unsealed, I would avoid 2-pot finishes; they are marvellous in many ways, but by design they are very hard and fairly inflexible. So if the moisture level of the timber varies, 2-pot finishes will crack as the timber swells or contracts, and that then lets water in under the varnish.
That still leaves a considerable choice. My personal favourite is a varnish primer on sanded bare wood, and the primer which I use these days is International’s “Clear Wood Sealer Fast-Dry” (and what a mouthful of a name that is …), followed by Schooner (not to be confused with Schooner Gold). Four coats of the primer, and it really is fast-dry; in good conditions at this time of year you can apply all four coats in one day. Then anything from two to 6 coats of the Schooner, the more the better. That will give a stunning high gloss surface, probably about the best of the one-pot conventional finishes. Judge for yourself from the photo attached.
At the other end of the scale, one highly respected option is not to use varnish at all, but an oil-based penetrating finish such as Deks Olje. That doesn’t require the same skill or care in applying it, and it can be almost literally slapped on. The technique is to keep on applying it, wet on wet, until the wood will absorb no more, and then allow it to dry. Then, if you wish, you can overcoat it with the corresponding gloss product, which will give a varnish-like finish. The product was allegedly developed for Scandinavian fishing boats, which had a hard life, and whose owners could ill afford a lot of cosmetic labour in varnishing their boats. I myself tried it at one stage on a vintage wooden yacht, but I am not convinced that overall it is any less labour than varnish or any longer-lasting; however some others sing its praises to the skies.
Between these two there is International’s Original Yacht Varnish, and their Schooner Gold; an enquiry to their excellent Technical Helpline some years ago (after I tried the Schooner Gold and was displeased with it) evinced the information that the product is aimed at those who want a reasonably good result quickly, but that if I liked the standard Schooner I would probably not like the Schooner Gold! My issue with it was that it doesn’t flow out anything like as nicely as the standard Schooner, and the Technical Manager agreed with me. Having said that, this will be less critical on your boat because you are not looking to varnish large areas, so any limitations in how the varnish flows out will be less conspicuous.
One word of warning; don’t fall for the fact that International also make a product which they misleadingly name “Yacht Varnish” as part of their domestic range, which is sold at DIY supermarkets, etc. It is not the same product at all, and the small print on the tin even says “Not for marine use”. I ask you; a “Yacht Varnish” which is “Not for marine use”!!!
I happen to be most familiar with International Paints’ range, but I am sure that other specialist manufacturers are equally good. Hempel, Blakes, Epifanes, Awlgrip, etc., are all good.
Decades ago my favourite conventional varnish was Spinnaker, made by John Matthews. We don’t see it on the shelves so much these days, but it is in fact still available; however it is no longer made by the original manufacturer, and the rights are now held by an Italian company. It is so long ago that I used it (regularly in the late sixties and early seventies), and got superb results with it, but I have no way of establishing whether it is still made to the original recipe.
Hope this helps,
Oliver
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Oliver Shaw
ModeratorThe splice should at all times remain clear of the boom, but ideally only just clear when sheeted hard in. The splice will be thicker than the rest of the rope, so if you allow it to run into the block it may jam.
That said, I think there is a considerable degree of latitude, but for greatest efficiency in terms of minimising the sheet loads the splice should be as close to the boom as possible when centred and sheeted hard in (with the sail set, of course), as long as it remains outside the block.
One method that I inherited on the only boat of mine which had this system (as a cruising man I prefer transom sheeting, although I concede the benefit of the other system for racing) had the tails left very long, and led through bushes in the deck and then forward to a pair of clam cleats in the cockpit. That way you can readily adjust it, although once you have got it right you may well never need to alter it again.
Good luck,
Oliver
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorThe short answer is “either, at your choice”.
If your splicing is up to it, and I am sure mine is not, you can make your own.
Alternatively I am sure that any dinghy chandler familiar with GP14s could supply one, quite probably off the shelf. However you may have to actually ask them; a quick search online just now has turned up only one: https://www.tridentuk.com/gb/8mm-split-tail-main-sheet-cut-to-suit-gp14-mirror-wayfarer-osprey-flying-15.html
Since the illustration for this one is red, and most that I have seen have been white, there are presumably many others readily available.
Hope this is helpful,
Oliver
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorMy understanding is that the usual method, which is almost but not quite what you describe, has a split-tail mainsheet rather than a rope horse.
This arrangement has the practical advantage, which I think is probably unique to this arrangement, that the boom is always sheeted to the windward side of the transom, while at the same time ensuring that (if the twin tails are set up symmetrically) it can never be pulled above centre. One result of sheeting to the windward side is that for any given position of the boom when beating to windward the sheet load is very much reduced, as compared with sheeting to the centre, because the working part of the sheet is less vertical.
The system does of course rely on having a powerful kicker, so that the kicker alone can control the shape of the sail, and the sole duty of the sheet is to control how far in or out the boom is set. With early, less powerful, kickers the sheet had to also help control twist in the sail, and for that duty a more vertical pull was helpful – but a consequence was that sheet loads were higher.
This is of course a hybrid system, but it is mechanically a highly efficient system. The alternative system which you describe is a true centre sheeting system, which does not seem anything like so popular on GP14s (I cannot comment on other dinghy classes), although it is common enough on yachts; but there the primary function of the mainsheet is to control twist in the sail (a function performed on the GP14 by the kicker), and the lower block is on a traveller, with the traveller control lines being primarily responsible for sheeting the boom in or out.
Hope this helps,
Oliver
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorFascinating!
And I didn’t know about the Meteor boats, nor about John Fenn’s involvement with the Bluebird project.
Sail numbers 2001 – 3000 were issued in 1958-59, which may be some guide as to when she was built. However with a heavily-modified one-off there are questions as to how she came to be issued with a sail number at all, so that date may not be wholly reliable. Would the number have been issued to the boat unseen, and the boat then never presented for Measurement? Clearly she would not have measured to the rules in her present form. Or was the conversion retrospective, after she had been measured, and perhaps issued with a class certificate? One clue suggesting that the conversion may perhaps have been retrospective is that she was built with a slot for the centreboard, which was then capped; if the conversion was done at the time of building, why cut the slot?
It would be well worth your asking the Association for a copy of our records for the boat. Contact Julie (Admin) at the Office for this.
As you probably know, next year is the 70th Anniversary of the Class. As part of our planned celebrations we are intending to produce an Anniversary Book, following on from the sold-out 50 Years On The Water which commemorated our 50th. The new book will not only cover the last twenty years, but the entire 70 years; we are intending to include some parts of the earlier book, and also some new material covering aspects of the early years.
There may well be a chapter on the various builders, so we would be very interested in anything you can tell us about Fenn & Wood, and also about your boat, and the Meteor project. If you email me, either via the Office or at cruising@old.gp14.org, I will ensure that it gets to the right place.
Oliver
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorVery interesting modification, and congratulations on your restoration work; she is looking good, albeit unconventional in the GP14 world.
Fenn & Wood were one of the major builders at one time, and highly respected.
I presume that you will be refitting the centre thwart. Has the centreboard case been permanently removed, and the slot filled in, or is that work in progress, or perhaps just a trick of the camera angle?
Interesting that she has the rounded corners at the forward end of the cockpit, as per some modern GPs.
Interesting also that the stern deck has been removed. With that accommodation right aft, and the removal of the stern deck, this would seem to exacerbate the tendency of many less experienced owners to have the crew weight too far aft for hull efficiency, and drag the transom in the water.
I trust that you will be using her under outboard, rather than under oars? Or does she have an inboard? That could make a rather nice arrangement, and it would compensate to some extent for having crew weight aft.
And is that cabin assymetric, or is that merely a trick of the camera angle? Vertical sides to starboard, and perhaps ten degrees inward lean on the port side?
Philip Hoath, of Poole YC, has an interesting retro-converted GP14 harbour launch, which he uses approximately once per year for a transit of the Upper Thames.
Oliver
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Oliver Shaw
ModeratorThank you, Chris.
George, would you like to follow this up, and report back, please?
Thanks,
Oliver
Oliver Shaw
ModeratorI too would be interested in the history of the firm. All I do know is just a couple of snippets, picked up from (I think) Gareth Morris many years ago; I gather that the proprietor was known as “Barry the Boat”, and that they eventually closed down following a disastrous fire at their workshop round about year 2000, a fire which also destroyed vintage GP14 no. 10.
I suspect that Graham Knox will know something about their history, and possibly also Gareth.
I have likewise been impressed with their build quality, and I briefly owned one of their Series 1 boats, Strait Laced, no. 11930. I do know that they built in both wood and GRP.
For what it is worth I have tracked down a facebook page celebrating them, https://www.facebook.com/Don-Marine-105209796225888/, but that doesn’t give us any hard information about their history.
Oliver
-
AuthorPosts



