Chance
04-28-2012, 08:47 AM
Ebb,
Here's a closer look at exactly what we have just been talking about. I took this photo about two weeks ago. She retains her original deck gel coat and you can clearly see the cracks and subsequent water entry points around the cockpit sole and rudder shaft tube.
I believe it comes down to compromise and profit margins. That's why you have builders that can charge and command a premium (high end) vessels, and others that can still build a worthy vessel, albeit not free from future water ingress issues. After all doesn't it all come down to time? Much less time to do it the way they did, and besides, were they thinking of durability, structural integrity and water proofness of this very point from future decades of service?
What came first, I wonder? Was the hull and deck joined, then the shaft tube installed? (would have been a bear to glass in the tube under the cockpit this way). Perhaps the tube was installed, a bit longer than needed, then the deck / cockpit structure lowered over the hull and a hole made to allow the shaft tube to penetrate as the deck was lowered in a controlled motion.
I wonder if Pearson Yachts sat around and discussed the future vitality of our beloved Commanders and Ariels. Would they have agreed and even guessed that there would, after 40 years, still be a loyal following to such a model?
In the photo you can also clearly see what not to do. An owner created an oblong hole in the cockpit side wall, for anchillary functions of an outboard.
There is also a scum reveal line left from where the water level was in the cockpit, prior to me boarding her, and clearing debri from her cockpit scuppers so that she could self bail.
*Please note, I had permission from the owner of this vessel to board her and take photos.
Here's a closer look at exactly what we have just been talking about. I took this photo about two weeks ago. She retains her original deck gel coat and you can clearly see the cracks and subsequent water entry points around the cockpit sole and rudder shaft tube.
I believe it comes down to compromise and profit margins. That's why you have builders that can charge and command a premium (high end) vessels, and others that can still build a worthy vessel, albeit not free from future water ingress issues. After all doesn't it all come down to time? Much less time to do it the way they did, and besides, were they thinking of durability, structural integrity and water proofness of this very point from future decades of service?
What came first, I wonder? Was the hull and deck joined, then the shaft tube installed? (would have been a bear to glass in the tube under the cockpit this way). Perhaps the tube was installed, a bit longer than needed, then the deck / cockpit structure lowered over the hull and a hole made to allow the shaft tube to penetrate as the deck was lowered in a controlled motion.
I wonder if Pearson Yachts sat around and discussed the future vitality of our beloved Commanders and Ariels. Would they have agreed and even guessed that there would, after 40 years, still be a loyal following to such a model?
In the photo you can also clearly see what not to do. An owner created an oblong hole in the cockpit side wall, for anchillary functions of an outboard.
There is also a scum reveal line left from where the water level was in the cockpit, prior to me boarding her, and clearing debri from her cockpit scuppers so that she could self bail.
*Please note, I had permission from the owner of this vessel to board her and take photos.