I'm interested.
Printable View
I'm interested.
I'm interested
ok, i will round out the set, i'm in for $10/each on the chrome.
as long as i can have the replica builders plate that i'm gonna get shipped with it.
should it be chromed as well?
-km#3
The builders plate, located at the end of the cockpit, is aluminum, as I recall, and need not be chromed. The original certainly wasn't.
My commander name plate is bronze, original and does not appear to have ever been plated. We have #92.
I'm holding out for the Commander emblems. A guy in Arlington TX was going to see about having some made from pot metal. I'll try to contact him and see what he came up with. His commander emblem was in about the same shape as mine, but not quite as pitted. Goodwin's looks better.
I have a question for someone that knows about metals.
The original nameplate was potmetal, and did not have the gloss of chrome as I recall. My recollection was that it looked more aluminumish.
So the question is whether it would be better to plate the nameplates with zinc or nickel rather than chrome if I wanted to have a nameplate looking more like the original. Any other suggestions or comments?
I will contact the brass works and offer my Commander Emblems. The pics are posted way down in the thread. They are a little deteriorated, but hopefully they will work. I'll report back. Thanks to David Bogle for alerting me.
Jim (Commander Hull # 62)
Jim,
Goodwin's commander emblem has already been sent to Bristol Bronze. I think his photo, early in this thread, appears to show his will take less work than yours. That's per my recollection of your emblem condition (which was slightly better than mine.)
Pearson used bronze, oval plates on which it stamped the hull numbers. During the Ariel, Commander, Vanguard years the plates were chrome plated and a blue enamel added to form a background for the flag and Pearson name. In later years, the plates may not have been chromed, but I'm not sure of that.
Peter T,
Took a close up of the "A" on the plate I had sent off to make the copies. You can see that it still has chrome on it, except where they ground off some of the surface pits. Was shiny before I sent it off, so buffing didn't cause the shine. Black around edges is from the pattern mold. This is off 376, so its one of the late model boats (last 15% made). Don't know if they changed the plates over time-- might have.
Kent:
That is the way I recall they looked. Roger at Bristol Bronze was around the Pierson yard in the time frame of the Ariel. He said that the potmetal nameplate was originally very bright chrome, but faded almost immediately on leaving the yard.
He suggested a matte chrome finish would come close to duplicating the original - and that is what we will be having done.
I have been in contact with Bristol Bronze and they can reproduce the emblem in a silicon bronze casting. However, the more, the cheaper. So, how many folks would like them, subject, of course, to a price quote? Also, I have a set that I can send to Bristol for the mold, but mine have some deterioration. Does anyone have the emblems that are not too badly deteriorated? I have attached photos of the ones that I have.
Jim,
Better check with BB again, but I believe another Commander owner (Goodwin?) is sending them a plate to use as a pattern. See the earlier posts.
This is the copy being sent to Bristol for dupes .
It is off Commander #105 belonging to Robert Lemasters.
I think the Association should get a quantity made and then sell them. I certiainly am interested (two sets please- one for the boat and one for my coffin ;-), but how will we know who else is? If the Association posts the availability in the newsletter and on the web home page the takers will start to trickle in. Just a thought.
I don't know how the weatherstripping procurement process went, but the final cost seemed high. I would want to hold the costs down as much as possible. Chrome plating could be an option, but that's what they need in my opinion, to be "as original" and to show up against the dark varnished mahogany.