1973 22.2 REBUILD

[RickK]

Now you got it  8)
Show us what you got - press enter twice after each pic before you paste the next one in.  You can put all of them in one post.

[Mad Dog]

PD,
There are some obvious signs that your boat has had restoration work done already.  I may be wrong but by looking at the underside of the sole, it appears the plywood was sealed with something other than a chop gun (like my '75) and that's a good thing.  It leads me to believe it was replaced.  The fuel tank was probably replaced or at least cleaned up and coated (mine was not coated and suffered crevice corrosion). To big to post but you can see what happens to unprotected aluminum.
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150 ... ure033.jpg
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150 ... ure031.jpg
The patch plate over the fuelfill chase indicates the hoses or the fuel fill thru-hull was replaced.  The photos of the stringers and bilge area show very clean and no delamination, but maybe some reinforcements using woven roving.  That foam behind the fuel tank is probably not USCG approved flotation foam (it's that goop stuff we buy at Home Depot for insulation).  I think its bad practice the put any foam around the fuel tank anyway.  I would clean that out and repair the aluminum straps to hold the tank in place.  I noticed the bowrail has welded mounting brackets, that's probably not original but it looks more durable than the clamp on style that was on mine.  Also the bow light and vent caps look pretty good for a 36 year old boat.  

All in all it looks to be in very good condition.  I couldn't tell much about the transom.  Be sure to test all the penetrations with a screwdriver or awl looking for wet wood.  I would still have it surveyed for condition.  Its a bit of insurance before you move ahead with any money and labor you plan to put into it.  

Goood Luck,

MD  

[PETEDOG]

I hope everybody had a good Christmas and New Year.

Thanks Mad Dog for your response. I think i'm going to leave the floor. I would hate too pull it and find out I did not need too. This will save me alot of time and money. The tank is only 52 gallons. I think i'm going to pull it and try to put in a larger tank. I would like to try to get at least an 80 gallon tank if possible. Does anybody know of a good tank company in the Tampa Bay area?

I'm gonna work on cleaning up the area around the tank. Has anybody ever had the rim repaired around the tank lid. There is only a small area needing to be repaired. Just wondering if a repair will hold up.

Thanks P.D

[Mad Dog]

These are the guys that built my replacement tank.  You tell them the deminsions and they build it.  I am well pleased with my new tank.

http://www.speedytanks.com/

MD  

[PETEDOG]

http://i848.photobucket.com/albums/ab45/PETEDOG_photos/SL730046.jpg

I removed the tank today and cleaned out the entire area. I was lucky and there were only a few gallons of gas in the tank. The strap holding the tank in had one bolt pulled from the side of the stringer. I also removed all the old wiring.  

I was able to get a better look at the stringers. They APPEAR to be in good shape. The block that that the tank sits on needs a liitle work. There was a 1/4 inch board under the tank that was also removed. Still debating on pulling up the floor to refoam the stringers.

P.D

[PETEDOG]

I've done no work on my boat due to a bum knee that needed surgery. I have picked up several items for my rebuild. I purchased a stainless marine motor brakcet with swim platforms and a hydrolic motor lift.

I also purchased a like new t-top with an upper control box. I hope to begin working on the boat soon.



petedog

[PETEDOG]

I am getting ready to do my transom. I have the chance to get a poured transom instead of doing plywood. I am going to be putting a stainless marine bracket/w swim platforms on the back. I will be running a 2001 yamaha 200 hp. Is there any advantage or disadvantage to having a poured transom? I have looked at several threads and most transoms or done with plywood?

Thanks for any input

Petedog

[Mad Dog]

I would, and did, recore with plywood.  The technical specs I have seen all say the poured fillers tend to be brittle providing too little strenght when adding a bracket.  Also, have, or will, you reinforce the transom with knee braces connecting to the stringers?  A bracket with a 500# engine hanging off the end will put a ton of torque on the transom.  Check out Shine's and LilRichard's rebuilds.  They did theirs the right way.

MD  

[slippery73]

I would, and did, recore with plywood.  The technical specs I have seen all say the poured fillers tend to be brittle providing too little strenght when adding a bracket.  Also, have, or will, you reinforce the transom with knee braces connecting to the stringers?  A bracket with a 500# engine hanging off the end will put a ton of torque on the transom.  Check out Shine's and LilRichard's rebuilds.  They did theirs the right way.

MD  

What technical specs are you looking at? All of the specs i've read have all been mechanically much stronger than a plywood or foam composite transom. Its also decay and rot resistant, will never absorb water etc.  There's a bunch of manufacturers ( venture, hydrasports, canyon bay, robalo, angler, etc.)  that are going this route on there new production boats. Its also the preferred method by many boat rebuilders because of its strength, ease of use, and longevity. It might cost a little more than plywood, but to have something thats much more durable, that you will never, ever have to worry about, its a no brainer. You'd be dumb to put plywood back in your boat with this material only costing a little more. The material cost is more but I would say you will probably save in labor costs depending on how your set up to use the material.

As far as it being brittle, its far from, Nidacore specifications show elastic yielding before failing. Meaning that the material has flex to it and that it will spring back once  force is not applied. Brittle items, (glass, concrete, carbon fiber, etc.) have a fail point that is almost identical to its ultimate strength vs. breaking strength. They have no give before failure occurs. Nidacore specifically notes that the product has elastic yield. I have samples of the used material, its not brittle at all, its not at all like straight resin.

You really wont have elastic yield issues with this material however, its solid. If done correctly the poured transom will last as long as the rest of the boat.


If Little Richard and Shine's rebuild use wood transoms then I wouldn't exactly call them "done the right way" I can't think of a single boat manufacturer that advertises how strong their "wood transoms" are. In fact, I cant think of a single builder (other than and entire wood built boat) that uses a wood transom. Wood transoms have been outdated for over 10 years with the advent of the composite foam products. The foam has its issues as well, but the pour seems to address all the problems of the foam and make a much better overall product.

[dirtwheelsfl]

If Little Richard and Shine's rebuild use wood transoms then I wouldn't exactly call them "done the right way" quote]


^ i dont know if id say that, if you know what youre doing and do it the right way, theres nothing wrong with a wood transom

[Mad Dog]

I would, and did, recore with plywood.  The technical specs I have seen all say the poured fillers tend to be brittle providing too little strenght when adding a bracket.  Also, have, or will, you reinforce the transom with knee braces connecting to the stringers?  A bracket with a 500# engine hanging off the end will put a ton of torque on the transom.  Check out Shine's and LilRichard's rebuilds.  They did theirs the right way.

MD  

What technical specs are you looking at? All of the specs i've read have all been mechanically much stronger than a plywood or foam composite transom. Its also decay and rot resistant, will never absorb water etc.  There's a bunch of manufacturers ( venture, hydrasports, canyon bay, robalo, angler, etc.)  that are going this route on there new production boats. Its also the preferred method by many boat rebuilders because of its strength, ease of use, and longevity. It might cost a little more than plywood, but to have something thats much more durable, that you will never, ever have to worry about, its a no brainer. You'd be dumb to put plywood back in your boat with this material only costing a little more. The material cost is more but I would say you will probably save in labor costs depending on how your set up to use the material.

As far as it being brittle, its far from, Nidacore specifications show elastic yielding before failing. Meaning that the material has flex to it and that it will spring back once  force is not applied. Brittle items, (glass, concrete, carbon fiber, etc.) have a fail point that is almost identical to its ultimate strength vs. breaking strength. They have no give before failure occurs. Nidacore specifically notes that the product has elastic yield. I have samples of the used material, its not brittle at all, its not at all like straight resin.

You really wont have elastic yield issues with this material however, its solid. If done correctly the poured transom will last as long as the rest of the boat.


If Little Richard and Shine's rebuild use wood transoms then I wouldn't exactly call them "done the right way" I can't think of a single boat manufacturer that advertises how strong their "wood transoms" are. In fact, I cant think of a single builder (other than and entire wood built boat) that uses a wood transom. Wood transoms have been outdated for over 10 years with the advent of the composite foam products. The foam has its issues as well, but the pour seems to address all the problems of the foam and make a much better overall product.

Your right.  I'm an idiot.  :|

By the way, you should contact Joel Shine at Boat Builders Central and tell him he doesn't know what he is doing.

MD  

[slippery73]

Your right.  I'm an idiot.  :|

By the way, you should contact Joel Shine at Boat Builders Central and tell him he doesn't know what he is doing.

MD  

You are if you think that "the right way" to build a boat transom is with plywood. I don't have any qualms with my commentary on Lilrichard's or Shines build. Joel runs a company that sells plans and materials for building WOOD boats. I would say he might possibly have a little bias towards recommending the use of wood, epoxy, etc. as he sells those products via the internet. In fact his build was used as a marketing tool to show others the products and techniques used to rebuild an old boat. Wouldn't be very tactful marketing if he used products on his boat that he didn't sell. He also planned on selling the boat as soon as it was done, so to him it wouldn't really matter if the transom lasted 5 years or 30. Im not bashing Mr. Shine or making it out to say he was taking shortcuts or building an inferior product, wood has its uses in boats. But the fact remains that it rots, delaminates, etc. Extreme care has to be taken with wood on a boat, you would be stuck doing any kind of service work on the boat. Any area that the glass is penetrated and wood is not sealed 100% are areas that water intrudes, goes into the wood pores, travels longitudinally throughout the wood fibers and eventually rots. As it rots it swells, breaks fiberglass bonds, etc. Plywood used as decking is inferior to the original balsa core of the factory deck, it usually doesn't last half the time of the balsa because of the orientation of the wood fibers and how water travels through it. So, is that the right way to build things? Use inferior materials than the factory?

Usually in restoration it is the goal to improve upon the original equipment, make the classic your restoring last longer, not shorter.

[PETEDOG]

Thanks for the input. I'm sure both work great if they are done right. I stripped the transom over the last three mornings. I only have a little wood left to grind off. I cut back the last six inches of the floor and removed six inches of stringers. The foam was water logged. I will be removing the floor and opening up the stringers to remove the foam.

Again, thanks for the input,  heres a picture of my long overdue progress.

P.D.

[PETEDOG]

I took the floor off and what a good decision that was. I found four squares that had been cut into the stringers. I don't know why they would have done this. It's time to start grinding and working on the transom.

P.D

[RickK]

Old inboard engine mounting spots?