rudder discussions

I just acquired a 1965 outboard model Pearson Ariel. After spending a couple of weeks getting to know the boat, taking inventory, and doing some interior rehabilitation and work on the running rigging, I am preparing tackle the rudder and motor issues. I would greatly appreciate any advice from members of this forum or others who happen along. My e-mail address is scottg@solopublications.com

1. The rudder issue: I did not have the opportunity to haul the boat before I purchased it. Although highly desireable, this was just not possible. I did however hire a surveyor tp conduct an in water assessment. He will finish the survey when we haul. From the surveyor's (in water) assessment, it is likely that there are problems at the top and bottom of the rudder, so I assume that the rudder bearing (top) nd shoe (bottom)need work and or replacement. I have joined the Ariel Association, and purchased and read the operating and maintenance manual, so I am now somewhat familiar with the rudder design and parts.

Since I am aware of another boat at this same dock that recently had rudder shaft electrolysis problems, shaft electrolysis is also a possibility. I don't think that this boat has been hauled in some time, and I want to do all that is necessary in a single haul-out when I haul the boat later this month. That means ordering parts or having them made in advance if possible. Has anyone out there recently completed a rudder rehabiliation project on a Pearson Ariel? I am interested in knowing what to expect, where to order parts, or to whom I might go to to have them fabricated, and whether the actual condition of the rudder might be determined in advance of haul-out by a diver at least to some degree.

2. Motor issues: The outboard well on this boat has been enlarged to accomodate a 7.5 hp Honda that is likely near the end of it's useful life. The motor is not currently on the boat. I have lifting limitations due to a back injury. I am looking for two pieces of advice. I am sailing in Monterey Bay and in the open ocean. I have three questions.

a. What size motor is the minimum necessary to power this boat into and out of a harbor, and

b. What size is the minimum to power the boat into the wind on a flat day or into a swell on a windy day. From the recent post on this site it appears that a 6 hp 2 cycle motor might suffice in this regard.

3. I have read in the ops and maint manual of the Gauhauer lifting davit installation. Has anyone out there actually seen this lifting davit in action, or has anyone used similar (forespar or other)or dissimilar devices to lift the outboard from the well and from the well to dock?

Again I will be grateful for any responses I receive.

Regards,

Scott

1) Why are rudder problems suspected? Does it just feel a little sloppy? Is the tiller bolted on tight? Are the O rings OK?

2) What's wrong with the Honda?

I think the purpose of the engine lifting mechanism is to lift the engine out of the well after each sail so that it does not stay in the water all the time. While this may be the preferred method, I can't imagine doing it. I'm sure most people just leave it in the water. My 10 year old 8hp Yamaha seems quite happy that way.

If you only install/remove the engine once a year, a friend or the boatyard can do it for you.

As far as the rudder goes, I wouldn't get into trying to have parts fabricated until you're quite sure there is a real problem.

Not trying to curb your enthusiasm, just trying to save you alot of money.

Several times I thought my boat had problems that needed major repair or improvement, when it turned out everything was fine or just needed a little fix.

Now I tend to spend alot of time thinking about a project before I actually do it. Some people have the nerve to call this procrastination.

:B>

Scott, I agree with Pete on thinking out the issues and making sure the work needs to be done. These are stout little yachts and often don't need as much work as you might think. That being said I will offer you a couple insights from my experience. As a long time tenant of SC Harbor I can say with a great deal of confidence that a 6 hp long shaft is the ideal size motor for the Monterey Bay. As far as leaving it in the water I do disagree with Pete on that. Between the salt water and being in a hot harbor a motor left in the water will not last one year. There is a gentleman in SF (Gene Roberts) that has the Gauhauer lifting davit and he has all positive things to say about it. I also know of others that have rigged a small block and tackle lifting system that they hook on to the back stay that works well also. I can give you more info on that if you want it.

Three years ago I did a rudder shaft replacement job on Pathfinder. I tied this together with a regular bottom maintenance job. I did not need to touch the rudder shoe though. What I ended up doing is hauled the boat and removed the rudder. I had the metal shop at Svens in Alameda make up the new half shaft at a cost of appx $250 and about a four day wait. In the meantime I got to work on doing the bottom and stripping the rudder. The rudder work was done at home.

After getting the new shaft and mounting it on the rudder I chose to fiberglass the rudder. I worked with the guys at the glass shop on Capitola Road and 7th ave. They were very helpful in talking me through the whole project and getting me the materials that best fit the job. My cost for this was less than $100 and a lot of time sanding.

The end result was all the work done and the boat back in the water in two weeks time. You might be able to save a little time if you could have someone remove the rudder while the boat is still in the water. Not the easiest thing to do but an experienced diver can do it.

I have done both a re-power and a rudder repair. I chose a 9.9hp 2-stroke. I leave mine in the water. I sail on the Chesapeake and hve not had too much problems with motor deterioration in the past, but I did just replace a 1993 motor with a brand new one (not as a result of corrosion). If 8-10 years of life is all I can get out of an outboard that is left in the well, it is still worth it to me to avoid having to pull the motor up every time I sail, besides I have remote throttle and start cable hooked up and don't want to connect/disconnect them every time I go out.

I was surprised at the hefty biece of bronze that comprised the rudder shaft. When I first bought the boat there was some play in the rudder that I attributed to shaft deterioration, but I realized that this was not the cause when I took my rudder off. I did have some loosening of the rudder boards, and I solved this with filler and glass (directly over the teak rudder boards) The looseness that I spoke of was caused by the tiller end fitting and a larger than necessary clearence around the rudder post head. I was able to have the fitting pressed, which gave it a snug feel, but has also introduced some stress ( I've since noticed a tiny crack begining to form in this piece, and will probably need to get myself a new one in the near future)

I also recomend that you don't go buying the shaft until you know that you need it.

What do you do with the engine after you lift it up?

Leave it hanging there as an invitation to criminal elements?

Carry it off the boat to your car and take it home?

Carry it down into the cabin?

I suppose the lift could swing over the cockpit locker and you could lower it into there. But, the prop would surely ding something eventually.

If you do buy a new engine, keep in mind that some brands will not fit into the motor well. You definitely want to make sure the engine can swivel to make docking easier. Some types of engines will not fit because of their throttle arm configuration.

The throttle arm is removed if you have a remote control throttle/shift mechanism. I second the vote for that. It's a real neat feature.

Unfortunately, during a recent wild party on my boat, the shift arm on the remote control got broke off. But, that's another story altogether.

The vast majority of the boats that I have seen in the SF area do one of two things with the motor. It is either stowed in the lazarette or placed below decks. Those of us that race will remove the motor and stow it below directly under the mast.

I have to admit that the motor seems to be getting bigger and heavier every year.

Thank you to commanderpete, Ed Eskers, and bkeegel2 for your thoughtful responses to my questions.

Regarding the motor. It is helpful to know that a six horsepower long shaft will power another Ariel around Monterey Bay. I am not yet sure that I need to buy a new motor. The Honda 7.5 is about to head for the shop for an inspection and overhaul, but I wanted to know the range of options and alternatives before I authorize what could be a major overhaul. The repair folks tell me there is some evident corrosion damage. Frankly as a result of my lifting limitation, I want the lightest weight motor that will safely power this boat.

My previous small boat sailing experience has always presented me with an easily liftable transom mounted outboard. Although leaving the motor in the water is certainly a possibility, I have not considered it seriously in the past because of the strong recommendations against doing so by the manufacturers. On my last boat, I raised and lowered the transom-mounted motor every time I sailed. A padlock and chain was sufficient to discourage any would be motor pirates.

The Gauhauer lifting davit looks interesting to me, and the price of the unit at $200 seems reasonable given the fact that it can be used to move the motor from the dock to the well, and from the well to the cockpit, and I can't do either one by myself. Since the Association Maintenance Manual has documented Gene Roberts' installation of this lift in a Pearson Ariel, we know that they can be adapted for use in an Ariel. I was merely hoping that someone else out there had actually used one and might offer some advice in this regard. The information in the Association Maintenance and Operating Manual is very helpful and easy to understand. I have written to Gauhauer, but have not yet received a response.

Regarding the rudder issues, I have no idea at this point what is wrong with the rudder if anything. I feel a clunk when I move the rudder from side to side, and I do not have the expertise to know what that means. Frankly I wasn't too worried about it, until I spoke with the prior owners. My surveyor (in water only to-date) told me that from the feel of the rudder, he suspects that there is a problem at both the top and bottom of the shaft. The prior owners have more or less advised me against taking the boat out in the ocean with the current condition of the rudder, but I have no way of evaluating what that means since they did not define that condition. I don't think that this boat has been hauled for some time, so it is likely that no one will know the condition of the rudder until haulout.

I can't haul the boat until I get the existing motor or a new motor back on the boat, since I have to duck under a bridge with my tabernacled mast lowered to get to the yard. My desire is to haul once and not twice if possible. I read up on the rudder design in the Association Maintenance and Operating Manual, and noted that no manufacturers of replacement parts are listed for the rudder bearing, shoe or shaft. It is very good to know that Svendsen's yard can make up a half shaft (I assume that was the top half for Pathfinder) if necessary. My desire is to locate suppliers prior to hauling rather than spend my lay days running about, so that reference is very helpful.

I will probably rehabilitate the existing engine, drop it in the well, add a removable Gauhauer lifting davit, haul the boat, and take a good look at the rudder. It is helpful to see what other have experienced before I go to the yard for the first time. Overall I really like my new Ariel. I have spent a bit of time working below and on the running rigging. I also have a lot of deck work to do before the winter rains start.

Anyway I appreciate the advice to an Ariel-newby from you long term Ariel owners. Any additional comments or suggestions will be appreciated.

Scott

Scott a couple local knowledge points I might offer you. There is a yard in Alameda that has done at least one rudder shoe. The people at Grand Marina yard had a mold made and poured a new shoe. Additionally the fellow ebb inquired about a shoe and may have had one made as well. You might want to check with him.

In terms of your motor unless you have a personal relationship with Dave and his motor shop (off Seabright) I would encourage you to find some other shop to work on the motor. I have used the local shop Dave's Motor two times in recent years and both times after paying bills I ended up having to take the motor in to another shop and spending twice as much to have the same repairs done again and more. One shop that seems to be very trustworthy is the Outboard Motor Shop in Alameda near Svens. Good Luck.......ed

Ed,

Thanks for the additional advice regarding rudder shoes and outboard motors. I plan on having Honda dealer go through my 7.5 Honda. I have used that shop before to perform repairs on a Honda 9.9 on a boat that I take care of for a friend here locally in Santa Cruz, and with good results. They were nice enough to check my 7.5 out superficially for me, and although they noticed that there is some evident corrosion damage, they indicated that the motor appeared to have been well cared for. It is however a 1986 motor, and it has been used in salt water (when it was being used) for that entire period, so I am guardedly optimistic, but I do not anticipate that the motor will have a long remaining useful life. However the thing is a four cycle, and it weighs a ton, so in the long run I would probably be happier with a newer and lighter 6hp motor. If the repair estimate is too high, I will be shopping for a used 6hp motor.

I will track down that rudder shoe so that if I need it I will be able to obtain one quickly. Since I am in the midst of a rather extensive overhaul on this boat, I am trying to be careful about my priorities, so that I do not exceed my budget.

Once again thanks to all for the helpful advice. It is wonderful to have this sort of support system for a 35 year old boat....but what a boat!

I use a 1989 6hp Johnson long shaft and it works wonderfully. Gets me in and out of moorages easily and will push the boat against wind and chop to get to them if needed. I will say if you are going up against a stiff current, 4-5 knots or greater, you're probably better off waiting for the tide to turn. The motor is also pretty easy to hoist by hand and when not in use will lay flat in the lazarette. ( I'm not a big believer in leaving a motor in electrically hot salt water unneccessarily) I even built a little cradle to secure it in so I can eliminate the drag of having it in the water when I'm travelling long distances.
As to the rudder, I agree with everyone else about not fixing it if it ain't really broke. There was some play in mine when I bought the boat and I decided to keep a close eye on it and wait and fix it if it got worse. Five years later I'm still waiting. It hasn't gotten any worse and I have used the boat a lot in that time. I have found it helps a bit to make sure the upper bearing is properly seated since it seems to work up away from the rudder shaft tube a little over time.

Thanks to tcoolidge for your response on the rudder and motor issues I raised. It looks like quite a few Ariel skippers use 6 hp motors. Knowing that is helpful, sicn my 7.9 Honda may or may not be on it's lasty legs. I received my Gauhauer catalog today. In a conversation with Gauhauer, I have learned that they have an upgrade to their lifting davit that makes the davit easier to use than it was before by a single hander. It sis not curently reflected in th catalog. I am heading in that direction, and will post my impression when I reach that point. As far as the rudder goes, I do not intend to fix what is not broken, but my surveyor and the prior owner both indicate that I have some work to do on this rudder, and I want to be as informed as possible before I haul out for the first time to minimize yard time, and running around while my boat is out of the water. So thanks to all for the valuable info on this subject. I am finding the Association Maintenance manual, this forum, and the frinedly community of Ariel owners to be valuable respources. This makes me very glad that I decided to buy an Ariel.

Scott,

If your boat has had galvanic activity sufficient to corrode the engine, and possibly the rudder shaft, make sure your surveyor takes a good look at the thru-hulls and sea cocks.

You also mentioned you have a "tabernacled mast." Maybe someday you could post some pictures of that custom feature. It sounds like a prior owner knew what they were doing.

Cheers,

Peter

Peter,

Yes we are going to take a look at thru hulls etc when I haul. I already had the in water survey at the dock, but it wasn't possible to move the boat under the bridge here to the marine yard before I took the plunge by buying the boat. My surveyor was very positive about everything with the exception of some corrosion in the rigging near the top of the mast, the obvious and plentiful impact related deck cracks, and also those in the cockpit, and the rudder issues. He felt pretty good about the thru hulls from his inside inspection, but of course we haven't looked at the hull below waterline yet or the rudder. The outflow thru hull for the head has been relocated, and the cockpit thu hulls are also newer, so I am hopeful that all is well.

Regarding the tabernacle and rigging, someone did a great job on the rigging and spent some money at one point. I have Norseman fittings all around and beefy pelican hooks and a very nice backstay adjusters, but the rigging is now older. The backstay chainplate is original and has not been upgraded, ansd some of the boom attachment points show considerable stress from the lowering process used in the tabernacle. I do want to rerig some things before I move the boat, so I am not yet happy with the tabernacle arrangement. At present it is more or less a two person operation that exceeds my lifting limitation.

One thing to watch out for in a tabernacle is that the mast base should be elevated so that the mast will fully lower without hitting the forward hatch. This is not the case on my boat, so I can not lower the mast far enough to do work on the mast head. You might be surprised how that forward hatch interfers with lowering the mast. On my last boat, I could stand on a short step ladder on the dock and wpork on the mast head. That is very desireable since you don't have to climb the mast to do rigging work or paint the mast.

Also a raised mast base would ease the process of running the halyards back to the cockpit. I am wondering how others have handled that issue, although that is probably a good topic for another post and not this thread. I don't much like drilling more holes near the base of my mast. Starboard and port deck organizer blocks have been installed on the top of th cabin, and there are some appropriate openings (oval shaped holes)for block attachment in the aluminium mast base plate, but there is at present no way to run fair lines from the mast base plate up to the organizer blocks on the cabin top, so I need an intermediate block somewhere to properly align the halyards into those fixed organizer blocks. I have an inelegant solution, but I am still looking for an elegant one. Perhaps I should post another question on the forum on this item.

I will take photos of my tabernacle for anyone who wants them. I do maintain a sailing web page that is listed with my info on this forum's members page. I currently have feature pages on the Marieholm IF Boat, the Marieholm 26, the Lapworth 24 Gladiator. I am currently developing an Ariel page, and hope to post some useful info there including photos in time.

As of this time I have not taken a single photo of my boat, since the work I have been doing is primarily cleaning, painting, electrical, and some cosmetic stuff. When I get into technical modifications, I intend to post those to my site in hopes that they wil be useful to others. I have a lot to do on this boat. I plan to spend some time thinking out tabernacle modifications; installation of a motor lifting davit ( I am in contact with an Ariel Association member who has installed a Gauhauer davit sucessfully; a unique removeable lifeline system (its' about half designed at present); and I also want to deal with the lack of an ice box (I have a spiffy good looking chart table instead); and a head (my boat has none).

Thanks for your comments. This thread has been very helpful to me.

Scott,

The manual has an alternative mast step design in the appendix. It was for a boat located in Klamath Falls, OR that was trailered extensively.

As for lines eminating from the mast, come to the ISR on October 20. Most of the boats participating lead their sail control lines to the cockpit. Although similar, you will see some different approaches.

Bill

Bill,

Thanks for the suggestion. I will be at the event on the 20th. However I have a prior commitment here, So I will probably not arrive in Alameda until about 5:00 PM. I look forward to meeting you then, and seeing how others have handled running their halyards back to the cockpit.

Since on my boat two very nice deck organizer blocks have been installed on the topmost portion of the cabin, back from the front edge, my options are limited. The blocks were installed by the previous owner, but the project was never completed. The location of those blocks is the determining factor in designing the rest of the system. I do not intent to move those blocks. A further factor is the tabernacle arrangement, since the mast with its halyards, downhaul reefing lines etc. need to move forward. Therefore I presume that all lines that have been run to the cockpit from the mast mast be uncleated and left to run free before the mast is lowered, and then secured again once it is raised. Motoring beneath a bridge with the intent of sailing on the other side immediately afterwards by a single hander should be an interestiung drill.

Regarding the taberbacle. The metal portions of mine seem just fine in general, with the exception of the conflict between the forward hatch and the lower portion of the mast. This is not a problem for slipping under the bridge here, which is the major objective of the tabernacle,but it does make working on the top portion of the mast at the dock impossible, since the mast cannot be lowered sufficiently to reach the uper portion of the mast in a reasonable manner from the dock. There would be little point in modifying the mast step to solve this problem unless one wanted to replace the standing rigging. In designing a tabernacle system however the mast/forward hatch conflict is an important consideration.

My issue with tabernaclke involves the mast raising and lowering process, which is now accomplished with the main halyard, a six foot length of line to permit the halyard to be attached to the end of the boom, the purchase on the mainsheet tackle, some issues with the traveler, which is not in it's original location, and the current boom guy system.

I intend to modify the back stay to permit it to be detached in the vicinity of the end of the boom, and reattached to the boom to permit lowering of the mast using the backstay and a modified mainsheet system. A new boom guy arrangement is still under study. It will involve some other systems. The current set-up is pretty much a two person operation, but it seems to work fine in that application. For a single hander, it would be tough to do all the stuff you have to do to get the mast down and up again while the boat is moving down a crowded yacht harbor channel.

Thanks again for your comments. See you on the 20th, and for this great forum.

I tip my hat to you.

Don't think you need to worry too much about the Harbor Channel being crowded, though. Once those other boaters see your mast pointing out from the bow like an evil prow they're going to give you a wide berth. ;)

Commanderpete,

You'd be surprised what damage you can do with your mast lowered. The fellow who bought my last boat managed to hit the bridge and dismast the boat. I don't know where the mast was at the time. There is an interesting electrical or phone line just past the bridge when you come in. If you pull the mast up too soon...well the result is not nice.

There are some interesting scratch marks on the bottom side of the bridge. The height of the bridge above sea level varies based on the tide of course, and this surprises some people who get used to how far they play out their main sheet when they lower their mast.

Some folks in the outer harbor do come zipping out of their slips into the harbor channel, and not always after careful consideration of the trajectories of those who are about to, or who have just raised or lowered their masts, and some of those are under sail power so they have right of way. It can get dicey. The simpler the tabernacle, the better.

Also these tabernacle rigs have a lot of stability in the fore and aft direction, but very little lateral stability. You would not want to cause a force to be exerted on the mast to port or starboard while it is down. A weell designed boom guy set-up helps keep the boom from flopping over, but does not stay the mast. The aft lower shroud is released and the foreward shroud is slack. A quick turn to avoid a collision with a mast down at a 30 degree angle off the water and your aft lower shrouds and back stay released would not be my choice, particlularly when single handing. It is of course a good idea to keep your crew (if you have one) off the foredeck once the backdstay has been released.

The sad thing about this tabernacle business is that it doesn't have very much to do with sailing, but it requires a lot of bucks to modify the rig to safely lower and raise the mast.I am fortunate to have purchased a boat with a rig that has already been tabernacled.

You can firm up the rudder play at the top end of the shaft with a Cutlass bearing of the proper size , did that to #45 this summer and it feels great . The repair is documented on the Ariel Yahoo site .

Mike

Mike,

Thank you for your reply to my question about the Ariel rudder.

I looked at the photos of your cutlass bearing on the Yahoo Ariel site, but I did not see a written description of its use or installation on theYahoo site. I am new to that web site, so perhaps I wasn't looking in the right place.

In any case, that's a very interesting solution to rudder shaft play. There does not seem to be a lot of play in my rudder, but there is a clunking noise when one turns the tiller sharply. I do have a spare rudder bearing. Hopefully that will solve part of my problem, although my surveyor tells me that I should also be worried about the bottom of the rudder, and the prior owners told me that they do not recommend taking the boat out into the ocean until the rudder is repaired, but were not specific about what was needed.

Since I have not yet had my rudder out of the water, I don't know yet exactly what I have, or how much of a rudder is actually down there.

Do I understand that you used the cutlass bearing instead of the designed rudder brearing, or was the cutlass bearing used in addition to the standard Ariel rudder bearing? Is there a posting or an uploaded file on the Yahoo site that describes in text form your fix for rudder play?

Scott,
From what I saw , there really isn't much of a top bearing , just an O-ring in the ruddershaft cap .

To read the details at Yahoo , go to the site , look for MESSAGES , and read the threads in July .
If you need more info , let me know .

My repair gives you 4" of bearing surface and it feels like new .

Mike

Mike,

Thanks, the postings in the messages area of the Yahoo site begining in June 2001 and continuing thru July are very clear regarding the use of and specification for the cutlass bearing you used on your Ariel. I appreciate you pointing me in the right direction. I was given a cylindrical piece of plastic (pvc)and told it was the rudder bearing. The plastic cylinder has a rubber "o" ring on it.

I do have one more question for you, however.

Your June 26, 2001 posting on the Yahoo site states in part, "Got a piece of cutlass bearing stock , and made a bushing that goes down
the fiberglass tube under the tiller fitting.
I used 1 1/2" OD X 1" ID bearing stock , fits perfectly inside glass tube."

Page 168 of the Ariel Association Manual shows a drawing of a "rudder post bearing and rudder post". The bearing depicted on that page appears to be identical to the part that I have. Am I to assume that your cutlass bearing section slips into the rudder post tube under this cylinder, or is your bearing a replacement part for the pvc unit depicted on page 168 of the manual?

Thanks,

My bearing was a complete replacement as I had no bearing at all left in the rudder post.

Mike,

Thanks again. The picture is now complete. Fortunately I do have a brand new bearing, but I find your cutlass bearing solution to be quite intriguing.

Scott, Mike, me and my gal's crooked rudder tube will have to use the short bearing. the micarta original is too beat up, so Scott where did you say you got the new one? What is it made out of? I was thinking a replacement could be machined out of delrin just like the original with in and out O-rings

He Ebb, there's a tech drawing of the bearing in the manual. Check page 168

ebb,

The rudder bearing I have is brand new, but came with the boat when I bought it. I am not aware source or of the manufacturer. It looks like it was manufactured by someone who knew what they were doing, and appears to be indentical to the drawings in the Association Maintenance Manual. What's it made of? I'm not sure. It is white plastic of some sort with rubber or synthetic "o" rings. It could be an original Pearson part for all I know, but as I say it is brand new.:)

I can't resist getting in my two cents of free advice from a Great Lakes skipper regarding motor size. I used to have a 6 HP vinrude and found the motor very inadequate, at least in this environment.
1. Reverse is terrible. When going into a slip in a wind, where it is necessary to maintain speed to maintain steerage, the motor cavitates in reverse and does little to stop the boat. This might be OK if you have a bulky crew with substantial mass, that is reliable. However, it is not a good scene with the Mrs.

2. If you have to travel a distance to get to the open water, the difference in speed between and 6hp and your motor, or a larger one is significant (perhaps as much as 2 mph)

3. At least on the Great Lakes, the Ariel does not do well in a chop under motor power. Relatively little wind or chop can stop it in its tracks. Power (and a power prop) make the difference.

I have also had a 9.9 McCollough which did well, and now have a Yamaha 2 cycle 8hp which works well. The Yamaha is a light engine (about 62lbs, as I recall). I have moved the battery forward, and generally only fill the two gas cans half full (unless crossing large distances) to keep the stern light. I don't pull the engine - even in the winter - but then, I don't have to contend with salt water.

So, in summary, if you are cruising, and sailing with the motor installed, I would go larger, not smaller. The 7.5 should do well, but make sure you have a power prop. That makes all the difference in the world.

I finally completed most of my topside work, and went for my first sail. After encountering some steering trouble at sea last Monday, I hired a diver to take a look at the plans in the Association Maintenance Manual and then inspected on my rudder prior to a haul-out while my boat was in teh water.

On Monday, the boat handled well in light winds, but when the wind picked up to about fifteen knots, the boat did not want to fall off from a close reach onto a beam reach even after the sails were relaxed, and I pulled the rufdder hard over. The sensation was that the rudder seemed to have little influence on the direction of th boat. The boat wanted to hold it's close reach course.

The diver tells me that although the rudder looks very much like the one in the Association Maintenance Manual, the installation is not the same as shown in the manual. He tells me that the bronze shaft is one piece.

He also tells me that the shaft seems well seated in the "shoe" on the bottom end, although he described the shoe as an extension of the back of the keel. He told me what I already know, and that is that the top of the shaft has a lot of play in it. I have a new bearing which appears to meet the specification in the manual.

So today I attempted to install the new rudder bearing while my boat was in the water. I removed the tiller, and then removed the two (one was missing) setscrews on the chrome-bronze end cap that covers the upper shaft bearing. The setscrews removed easily, and the end cap now turns freely. I then removed the bolt in the forward side of the chrome-bronze tiller head fitting.

The bolt removed easily, but the chrome-bronze tiller head fitting won't budge. The plan in the manual show a key or keyway, which extends for two inches from the top of the bronze shaft downward, identified on page 170 as "Keyway 1/4" Key".

I am not sure what that means, but from what I can see of my bronze shaft it appears to be perfectly round. I can find no drawing of the tiller head fitting in the manual, although I have a drawing of the shaft, one of the glass tube, and upper bearing, and one of the rudder shoe.

Now my chrome-bronze tiller head fitting, which is stuck to the bronze rudder shaft, can be lifted (along with the bronze shaft) by hand to a position about one inch or more above the top of the chrome-bronze end cap.

My tiller head fitting has a slit in the front, presumably so that when one tightens the bolt on the front side it compresses the fitting onto the shaft. Again, I can't get the fitting off the cap.

My questions are:

Is this normal? Should the rudder be able to slide upon the tube a distance of one or more inches?

How on earth do you get the tiller head fitting off the bronze shaft without damaging it?
:confused:

That bronze bolt that holds the tiller head to the ruddershaft squeezes the tillerhead casting to the shaft. This is a very good thing. After backing off the bolt, try to pry it very slightly apart with the blade of a screwdriver so that it will slip off. Like maybe just tap the blade in the crack. When it loosens tap the tillerhead strate UP.

To my knowledge nothing keeps the rudder itself from rising except its weight and the bottom of the bustle. If there is a lot of room between the top of the rudder and the bottom of the hull your rudder has cleared the housing of the shoe. The gudgeon strap is what keeps it aimed at the shoe. When you remove your rudder you first will have to remove this gudgeon.

The reason you have only a bearing under the tillerhead and NOT at the bottom of the bustle where the shaft emerges is so that when you remove the gudgeon the rudder can be moved over enough to clear the shoe so the rudder can be dropped out of the boat.

IMCO the gudgeon should be placed in such a way so that if a grounding occurs the rudder does NOT lift out of the shoe. There should be some play up and down but not so that a stone or whatever could get into the hole in the shoe. I don't know if this is an issue on as-builts as 338 came without the strap gudgeon.

Thanks Ebb,

That helps explain what is going on. My diver says that so far the rudder looks pretty good and he says that the rudder is seated well in the shoe or whatever that is down there at the bottom of my possibly modified rudder, but I am concerned about the ability of the rudder to rise one inch or more, as it does now, if that causes the bottom of the shaft to clear the shoe, and as you say possibly come out of the shoe.

How far should the rudder shaft lift the tiller head fitting above the end cap? In other words about what distance is normal, or how far before the bottom lifts clear of the shoe?

By the way, I did force a screwdriver into that crack. I gently pried it and even tapped it with my plastic hammer, but I was gentle about it. I did not want to break the fitting. The fitting didn't budge.

I tried to push upward by putting pressure upwards on the bottom of the fitting but it wouldn't budge.

It would seem to me that if one tapped up on the fitting, one would have to do so while holding securely with a clamp of some sort onto the bronze shaft, or else in my case since my shaft floats upwards by one inch or so, I would be tapping the whole bronze shaft upwards against the gudgeon, the bottom of the hull or whatever else holds it down there.

At present my diver sees no need to otherwise remove the rudder, which appears to be in good shape and has apparently already had a full-length shaft installed to replace the originally installed unit.

My objective is to replace the upper bearing and to otherwise with a diver insure that my rudder is safe, before I head fifteen miles away across more or less open ocean to the marine yard where I intend to haul out for the first time. Since I had some steering problems last Monday in fifteen knots of wind, I am particularly wary. On the other hand it was my first trip to sea in Augustine, and the turkey at the helm could have been part of my steering problem...Although I have experience sailing a variety of fin and full keel boats in all sorts of sea and wind conditions, and have previously broken off two rudders on fin keel boats while at sea, I am brand new to the Pearson Ariel, have never before sailed on one, and am therefore a novice in this regard. I did have the traveler secured on the high side and hadn't yet moved it into a low side (leeward) position after a prior tack when I was attempting to fall off. That would have given me somewhat more weather helm I assume, but that much? I don't think so.

I have encountered boats that won't tack, but not being able to fall off only happened to me once before, and that boat had lost it's rudder. Then again we were eventually able to fall off and did not have any other problems that day.

My problem could just be the need of a top bearing, or could have resulted if the shaft for some reason rose out of the shoe or for some other reason was binding below. However my diver and I played wit the rudder in the water two days ago and it seems to be working just fine.

So all thoughts on this matter will be helpful.

Thanks

Scott, the tiller head fitting can be difficult to remove. Forcing the tangs apart and using a hammer from below worked for me. The gudgeon is strong enough to take the abuse. [When all else fails, get a bigger hammer :)]

With the tiller head fitting removed, removing the gudgeon and then lifting the shaft out of the shoe is how you remove the rudder assembly from the boat. The R&R description in the manual it not very detailed because the process is simple and straight forward.

There is a bit of "slack" in the shaft that results from the less than precision fitting of the gudgeon and shaft. Usually, it's the size of the notch in the rudder board around the area where the gudgeon and shaft meet that accounts for the upward movement. Not a problem since the tiller head fitting holds things in place.

It would be my opionion that your sailing difficulties had to do with sail trim and rig tune.

Even if you had NO bearing under the tillerhead you could still steer - because the rudder is captured by the rudder tube. It would make you very unhappy.

A new top bearing is a topic you can find on the history channel HERE I hope. Mike used a piece of cutlass bearing with success. 338 will have machined delrin in a copy of the original black micarta (because the r. tube is crooked requireing the short bearing.) If I remember there was no concensus on what actually to do for a spec replacement.

If you have a normal shoe, there is a 3/4" diameter hole 3/4" deep in the heel. Your 1" shaft is turned at the bottom to fit. It actually rides on that bit of a flange on the shoe. If you raise the rudder an actual inch you have cleared the hole and only the copper strap is containing the rudder shaft.

It's probably too bloody esoteric but I think there should be a bearing in the form of a washer between the ruddershaft flange and the bearing surface of the shoe. Any ideas? (deathly silence)

Make sure you do separate what the bolt has squeezed together. It's all a single casting that part. You may want to use a chisel the width of the metal to force it open. More surface to evenly open the split than a screwdriver blade. The bronze is a bit soft. And only you know how long it's been on there.:o

I was out single handing yesterday 8 hrs ( celebrating no chemo needed )in a fair breeze , full main and working jib ( should have had 1st reef in main ) , I was able to balance out the boat and walk to the foredeck to clear a sheet , my cutlass bearing adaption works just fine . Was able to steer with my butt when tacking so both hands were free to handle the sheets .
I was rail down and tiller was centered in the cockpit , main traveler was eased all the way down .
I agree with Bill , I think your rig is out or you were overtrimmed .

Scott,
I want to offer a couple of thoughts just to make sure the trip to the yard is safe for you. First I agree with everything being said already. The one point that I did not hear from you or your diver is if there even is a gudgeon/ copper strap. Ebb is right on, if you can raise the shaft one inch there is something wrong. If the shaft lifts that much and the head does come off the next thing to happen is the rudder could end up in the mud.

The second point I might offer is if you had to pull as hard as you say you did and there was no response to the helm other than heavy pressure you might have smoothed off the key in the tiller head. This might be some of the problem in getting the head off. On Pathfinder the key way is hard metal but the key is very soft brass. I have not seen this potential key problem occur but I could see a way it could happen.

My last point/tip is from some years ago. I recall the first time I attempt to remove the tiller head it was a bear to get off. After doing all the spreading and tapping I ended up using blocks and pry bars while someone else tapped. It took some time and switching back and forth but it finally did pop. As a added note I often add a little brass shim paper to the key now that helps take up some of the sloop in the key way......ed

Thanks for all the responses.

My diver returned on Friday morning and did full bottom cleaning for me. I lifted the rudder, and although it does lift one full inch, the diver advised me that the bottom of the post remains in the shoe. The diver reaffirmed that my rudder shaft is one part from hull to shoe, and therfore is other than original. He feels that the rudder and shaft is sound. My bottom paint is even in good condition. Therefore I must conclude that the rudder shaft that I have is slightly different than "as built" designs on other Ariels. Since significant changes were also mae in the rigging, I assume that someone devoted some time and money to upgrading this boat at some time in the past.

I retensioned my stays and took the boat out on Friday afternoon in about 20 knots of wind and a building swell. We sailed with the rail down for about two and a half very wet hours on all points of sail, and had absolutely no trouble steering. This time, we kept the main centered on the traveler the whole day. I had a very experienced friend aboard, and we both concluded that the boat sails well, and that the rudder works as intended. Also, with a clean bottom, Augustine sails wonderfully.

So the suggestions on tuning and mainsail trim seem to have been good ones. My original impressions of lack of rudder control were gathered on the mainden voyage, with a basically untuned rig, poorly trimmed sails and with the understanding from the prior owner that the rudder has some structural problems.

Since my diver has now inspected the rudder, and I tested the rudder at the dock with the diver and under sea conditions and the rudder seems to be to be sound, I feel that I can proceed to sail away to haulout. I will probably dive down there and take a look at it myself before I sail off to haulout just to make sure that there is a gudgeon based on the last comments from Ed.

Thanks again for all the advice on how to get this pesky tiller head fitting off the shaft. By the way, Augustine is looking good and reflecting the hard above waterline work of the past year. I hope to add some photos to my Ariel web site soon.

OK, so forget what I said.

Thanks to all the advice from this site, and plastic hammer, and a mess of anti-corrosion stuff, I was able to get my the tiller head fitting off today...and surprise: I discoverd that the reason the tiller head fitting had been so pesky to remove was that a cylinder made from an aluminum Pepsi can had been used as a shim so that the "jaws" on the tiller head fitting would not clamp shut before the tiller head fitting was clamped tightly to the bronze shaft.

So, we have a chromed-bronze tiller head fitting secured with stainless steel bolts and an aluminum shim to a bronze rudder shaft.

Has anyone encountered this before?

By the way; there is still play in my upper rudder, but the Delrin bearing (white plastic bushing) and its O rings look as if they are nearly new.

To get rid of the upper play , my cutlass bearing fix took out 100% of mine . There is a bearing that fits perfectly and is easy to install .

Wouldn't mind seeing what this white plastic and O-ring bearing looks like. IMCO the top of the rudder tube is too funky for hi-tech. The lop-sided micarta bearing on 338 was there 35 year. The chrome top held it on with set screws in the frp! Not vey well.

Aren't O-rings for compression aaapplications? They wouldn't be worth a damn in the turning of the shaft against a stationary bearing surface. Course if you had a zertz fitting on the tube you give it a shot of grease every Sunday. Might work.

Go cutlass. Or have the original remade. Ref the Mighty Manual.

The white plastic piece with the O rings looks exactly like the one in the technical drawing in the appendix of the Ariel Association Maintenance Manual. I have two of them. One is in use at the top of the rudder tube. It fits very snuggly over the bronze shaft inside the rudder tube, and the outside diameter of the top rim (flange) of the "bearing" is the same as that of the outside diameter of the rudder tube.

That "bearing" has been on the boat for some time apparently, but there is very little if any wear. The second "bearing" that I have is a nearly identical spare. The only diffeence is that the O rings on the spare bearing seem to be a little smaller in width, but of the same diameter as the bearing in active service.

I am still interested to know if if I am the only person out there with a Pepsi can wrapped around his rudder shaft inside of the tiller head fitting.

It seems that one could use a plastic shim instead of the Pepsi can, or even better file a small amount of bronze from the inside of the jaws of the tiller head fitting to permit the fitting to formly grasp the shaft without fully closing its jaws.

IMHO, you are the winner of the Pepsi can contest :D

Yes Bill, I probably am the winner of the Ariel Pepsicola Classic, however the aluminum shim in my tiller head fitting does raise a question:

Are shims commonly used in the Ariel tiller head fitting to insure a tight fit of the fitting onto the rudder shaft, or is this just not a problem on other boats. Pehaps my shaft, which is probably a replacement of the original, is slightly smaller than standard. The shaft, keyway and key appear to be in fine condition.

Is it best to replace the aluminum shim with a plastic shim? I am currently considering using the thin plastic sheet from a "No Hunting" sign.

Or would it be better to file off some of the the non threaded side of the tiller head fitting jaws so that the tiller head fitting will clamp tightly onto the shaft.

This is not a bearing problem, nor is it related to play in the tiller head. This issue relates solely to the fact that on my boat, without a shim, the tiller head fitting jaws will close totally before the fitting is tightly clamped onto the shaft, and therefore the prior owner used an aluminum shim made from a Pespi can to solve the problem. In short has anyone else out there shimmed the top of their shaft, or is my boat unique?

Sounds as though the relacement shaft is undersized making it necessary to shim it to hold the tiller head fitting. To the best of my knowledge, yours is the only boat to have this situation. Have you measured the shaft diameter?

Wouldn't be surprised if you took it to a machinist or you could do it yourself: hacksaw into the closed parts to make a little space to be squeezed. You'll probably just be cleaning out the crud in the crack anyway.

......well, well well. Just looked closely at 338s tiller head, and it does have a liner or shim around the inside of the hole. It could be brass. But I intend on using it again so I will make an effort to find bronze sheet. Might be hard to find. Ihe crack on it has had some bangs which makes it impossible to be drawn closed!

Edson makes a similar smaller/lighter tiller fitting for 1" shaft for around $100. The crack in it is 3/32". What makes this fitting interesting is that it has tangs for attaching to the tiller rather than the channel (on 338s) that limits the attachment to the top 1" of the tiller wood. It's a better design but not near as hefty. IMCO

[be advised that the keyway in the Edson is on the front of the shaft - the cockpit side]

Interesting. Maybe Pearson started using slightly thinner stock for the rudder shafts in the higher boat numbers. When I replaced the tiller head fitting on #76 (in the early '80's), there was no need to shim up the hole to get a grip on the rudder stock.

see below

I did try fit a piece of true 1"bronze shaft in the old tiller head with the shim and it slips right on. The new head fits more snug (in other words you can't get it on the shaft stock by hand) but it is chromed. Edson's plain bronze copy may slip on perfect.

338 did have a counterfeit rudder with a stock probably of s.s. propeller shaft as it showed no recognizable galvanic corrosion. It measures about 1/32 LESS that 1". No wonder there was slop! Can we assume that that barely discernable brass liner is ORIGINAL SHIM?:D

Hey, of all the things of which Pearson can be accused, using multiple metals below the water line is not one of them. 338's ss shaft was/is a replacement for the original bronze.

Very interesting. Augustine is hull #330, and has a shim inside th tiller head fitting, although not original, on a bronze shaft that is probably also not original. Ebb's Hull #338 seems to be in a different though parallel condition.

I want to replace my Pepsi can shim, and would like to find thin bronze sheet to do the trick, but failing to find such material, I will probably use plastic. Anyone know a source for thin sheets of bronze metal?

This rudder business will have to wait in any case. The rudder is serviceable at present, and I have to try out my spiffy new mast-base plates, which I had made of 316 stainless to mount a series of Garhauer blocks to run my lines back to the cockpit. I installed them today and they appear to work well to keep the lines clear as they pass over the rise in the deck. I will have to look for bronze shims later, but it is nice to know that there is at least one other boat out there with a shimmed tiller head fitting. Now I have to figure out what exactly I sholdl do about it.

Places that sell fasteners ( I dont mean HomeDumpo or Lowes ) usually have shim stock of all kinds . Look for an industrial fastener outlet they will either have it or know where to get it .

Thanks Mike. It's good to know that they make such stuff. I'll look for some shim stock at an industrial fastener outlet in the Bay Area, as soon as I locate one. In the mean time me and my Pepsi can shim are going sailing. I slathered it up with some corrosion prevention stuff for the time being.

ok Mike, into the breech. ......let's see, there used to be a had it all fastnerner place on Harrison, I think it was called Harrison and Harrison, in S.F. I'll check with that high end [expensive!] welding shop that's gotten me out of trouble. And there's Randy's [metal] Design - I know he knows. I wonder if one of those VAST catalogs I hear about have shim material. MC Masters??

Think I'll get me a selection. Be good to have on the boat. Stainless and monel too. Probably have to buy a pound each

Just a few random thoughts on the subject.

A former owner had sandwiched the original rudder of my #199 Ariel in fibreglass. As it aged, the glass decomposed, admitted and held water, which rotted the wood, etc, etc. During my "seat of the pants" removal and breakdown of the rudder for patterns, I found that the solid looking shaft was indeed the familiar 2 piece Pearson design. Easy to mistake, Scott, esp. for a diver.

My tiller also was sloppy, and excess wear was found along the sides of the block, where the tiller arms lay, forward of the pivot bolt. The previous owner raced a lot, and just wore it out. A little brazing and Bridgeport work brought it back to dimension.

When you haul your boat, if it doesn't have one, be sure to replace that copper strap to the keel about mid-shaft. It steadies the shaft against flexing, esp. when hard down and reversing, as well as holding it in the shoe.

When you reattach the tiller block to the shaft, be sure to apply a good quality Nevr Sieze to the mating surfaces. I use the copper based variety. For shimming I suggest brass shim stock, but sleeving and reboring to the actual shaft size is the best fix, if you have the time.

Talk with the Forum sailors, they are a great help. Murphy's law ordered me to do most of my repairs/rebuilding before I knew of the Forum. Now I sit here and moan "now they tell me".

When you splash it back in, SAIL THE DAMN THING. Pearsons are not show dogs. They like to hunt and are only happy beating to windward at about 22 degrees. Like C'pete says, if it ain't fun, why do it?

Cheers.

since Izzy left me with a broken rudder (see the thread about Izzy for a pic) i am mulling over various methods to replace it.

1. just epoxy the two halves back together, and put a few bronze straps (~12" long) across the repair on both sides of the rudder, bolted to each other.

2. make a new mahogany rudder. using the same manufacturing and attachment methods. nut pockets in the rudder and all. i can use all but one of the old bolts (one broke)

3. make a new rudder out of fiberglass. this method would leave me with the finished rudder having all the bronze rudder stock encased in fiberglass too. this might be difficult to install once finished. i would have to take off the shoe at the bottom, raise the whole boat up high enough to slide the rudder stock up into the boat and in the cockpit. and then replace the shoe again.

4. buy the beat up ariel that is in my yacht yard and currently for sale on Ebay, and strip it of all kinds of parts: rudder, spreader sockets, cleats, etc. and then sell the remaining parts to everybody in the association. wasn't someone previously looking for a rudder shoe, an icebox hatch/cover and some cleats?
when i was done raping and pilaging this boat, i would cut the lead out, sell it to a recycler, and throw the hull away. and Ariel #370 would die, but #3 would live on.....
It sounds like a joke, but really, i am seriously considering it.

any thoughts on the above?

I haven't been watching the auction but if C Pete doesn't mind buy the boat. It's in your yard, it's cheap, you'll get all of the pieces you'll need/want, you'll get your money back for salvage value. I hate the thought of destroying her but unless somebody really wants a project boat that's probably where she's headed. Why not get the most good out of her. Then use her rudderstock for a pattern to make a new solid rudder out of fiberglass or some other material. Then reproduce it and sell 'em to all of us for little or no profit!:D
For the time being I think option number one is your best bet. For what it's worth, Tony G

If you DO chop the boat, I'd really like the rudder shoe from the keel.

Best,
Dave

Option 1 seems simplest, probably cheapest and would probably work but is something of a stopgap measure. These boats, wonderful as they are, are getting along in years and eventually things need to be replaced if they are going to survive. I've generally found that when you have to start holding things together with straps and screws it's time to replace them.
Option 2 would be good if you can find the mahogany. The rudder that came on the boat lasted quite a while so there is no reason for a new one not to do the same. My reservations on this route are finding a decent piece of wood to build the new one out of and the possibility of corrosion or fatigue in the shaft or attachment points.
Option 3 would be great, especially if you follow Tony G's suggestion and produce a few. Since you're going to take it apart anyhow, ending up with a new rudder and not having to worry about it seems like the best possible outcome.
Option 4 would be worth considering just for the spare parts. Having a parts boat would be kind of handy. Before buying it just for the rudder, make sure that you are getting something worth the effort. The rudder and shaft are probably just as old as the one you have now.
If you do buy the ailing boat and want to part it out, let me know.
Tom
Furthur #332

I did option two, with two pieces of mahogney. It was tricky getting the bolts reset, but it was really interesting seeing how the rudder was origionally built.

Chris

My thought on canabalizing #370 is that it is a TERRIBLE waste.
The rudder is replaceable - but the Ariel isn't.
There just are not enough of these boats around.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if there was a competant and efficient yard that bought them and did a basic reconditioning to get them into the marketplaece again. Somebody will always want an Ariel or Commander!

Awhile ago an Ensign came into the yard that was lien saled. Nobody wanted her. It was stripped, chainsawed and crushed. Whenever these unfortunated boats are brought to the yard to be murdered, I make sure I have something else to do elsewhere.:mad:

someone else ended up buying the boat. and has not responded about his/her intentions (refurb or parting out).

i am leaning toward #1 for the next season, and using this next winter and summer to make a new one.

but whether to make a new mahogany, or a fiberglass one is up in the air. i am having trouble thinking throught the install of a fiberglass one.

if i make a fiberglass one that is complete, rudder with bronze pieces all molded into a solid, single unit, how on earth do i install it? i would have to have the aft end of the boat lifted like 3 feet into the air, just to have clearance to fit the rudder stock up into the boat ( the tiller/cockpit end).
my other thought is to replicate the shape the old rudder, and attach it to the rudder stock after the rudder stock is in the boat. but this introduces other problems: like how to do the fasteners, how to deal with the damn aperature, etc etc..
I don't like the idea of edge bolting a fiberglass rudder like the mahogany one is.
one idea is to leave really large holes in the rudder where the bolts/screws go in, push some screws into place, and fill the cavity with epoxy.

but whatever, that is a thought exercise for later.

I am looking at the same project. Since it appears I have to replace the rudder shoe I figure I might as well do the whole rudder system while I'm at it so it will be done and I don't have to worry about it any more. My current thought is to have a new ruddershaft fabricated with the attachment bolts replaced by bronze straps ( flat stock) welded (or bolted) to the shaft then laying up a cold molded strip planked rudder to fit precisely around the straps. The straps would be predrilled to allow placement of attachment screws (bolts?) to reinforce the bond. Strip planking would probably be epoxy saturated cedar, which would minimize water entry and result in an incredibly strong final product. It might be a little heavy, but since I'm not a racer, that doesn't bother me and I would end up with a sealed, easily paintable rudder. Any thoughts?

There's rudder stuff on the history channel here. Punch Search if interested.
338's clam shell rudder has just been reactivated.
Basically the top third of the blade comes apart, held by a keyed channel on the post with three bolts. On the trailing edge the shell is held with 4 machine screws.

The rudder post is silicon bronze, as are the 1/8" straps, as are the fastenings. as is the welding wire. The idea of course was to get all the metal parts the same to avoid galvanic action. That was fine until Bristol admitted to casting the shoe in manganese. I had a discussion with Bristol about my rudder - the upshot being that silicon bronze is too soft for the job. Bristol said they supplied Pearson with rudder stock in the Ariel days and it was manganese. Roger said that while made from manganese the rudder would last 150 years my silicone one was only good for fifty. Silicone is 98% copper.

Hell, I attached the Bristol shoe to the rebuilt heel of 338's keel with peened over silicon rod and it seems to be showing some corrosion with crusty bright green weeps. The boat has been out of the water for more than two years and its showing signs of corrosion!!! It's obvious that there still is saltwater in the laminate in the aftend of the keel. But we do have two bronzes reacting. Out of the water! They're holding hands in the galvanic series.

The take apart design (the idea is not to have to raise the boat) requires more metal I think than a straight welded rod and strap. I had to kind of double the strapping in the two-part clamshell area. A plain welded strap to the shaft design IMCO is a good alternative to having holes drilled in the rod for the bolts in the wood version. Altho there has been no problem with this design, I understand. except aging. With the 338 rudder I used a rigid closed cell expanded PVC foam (Divinycell) to fill the spaces. Setting it in with epoxy gell.

I'm just about to do the glass work. But keeping the take apart option makes the glass work very difficult and takes away from the massive strength gained with sheathing the whole blade with glass around the rudder post. To be able to still take it apart the upper third would be split along the rod and, of course, split to the clam shell. I need a chunk of time to ruminate on the complexity to have it come out ok.

Even so, I'm not happy with the small fastenings holding the design together.

If you did not build your rudder out of polyester and urethane foam like the production boats (C'pete's survey report) but used PVC foam and epoxy, I think the rudder would be waterproof, taking in very little water, depending on the workmanship.

[Weight wise, this is a heavy rudder. I think it will turn out to be much heavier than mahogany with a bronze shaft. I also think a recreation of the original rudder will enhance the value of the boat, while a composite or trick rudder might detract.
On the other hand a bronze rudder post (rod, shaft) with welded bronze strap (rolled sheet) developed into an efficient grid that comes to a more pointy trailing edge than the woody - with hard closedcell foam, epoxy and frp (not carbon fiber which is too distant on the galvanic scale
from bronze) - would be most desireable and nearly indistructable.]

Just want to add this:
There are problems with the rudder I remember.
Corrosion, galvanic action?, at the waterline IN the rudder tube. Manual, I think.

And I think there was something similar happening to the bolts holding the pieces together in the lower half of the mahogany rudder, from some posts in the past. The ones which pass thru the shaft.

Sacrificial zincs obviously play a big part in protecting the shoe and rudder. Has anybody a system that seems particularly efficient?

IE zinc on or near the shoe. Zinc on the rudder. Are they wired? Are they interconnected. Are they independant of thru hulls ETC ETC.

On #76 we use a teardrop shaped zinc attached to the shoe. That protects the shoe and the lower rudder shaft. Another zinc is attached to the upper rudder shaft via half a jumper cable - one end has the zinc and goes into the water. The other end with the battery clamp grips the bolts holding the tiller head fitting to the upper rudder shaft. Both zincs last about four years.

Ebb-
We must see pictures or a sketch of your rudder. I just cannot picture it.

Bill-
the teardrop anode: is it thru bolted in place of one of the broze nails/rivets that holds the shoe in place? is there one on both sides of the shoe (port and stbd)?

We have some early photos of Ebb's rudder design. I'll post them after I find them.

The zinc is not through bolted to the shoe, only fastened with machine screws using a couple of holes drilled on one side.

Photos of Ebb's new rudder mockup can be found on the Gallery forum in Ebb's Photo Gallery thread.

I got a call from my yard's carpenter about my rudder.

He wanted to do the following:
1. replace the two bronze shafts with a single stainless (or bronze) shaft with a plate welded edgewise along the length.
2. laminate two pieces of marine plywood on either side of the plate and shape the rudder from that.
3. coat the whole thing with a few layers of fiberglass.

He claims that stainless up against the bronze shoe is not an electrolytic problem. I have my doubts.
He also (after some nudging from me) realized that the install would include lifting the boat about 5' to put in this massive long rudder assembly.

I told him to write up the estimate, but not start the work. I don't think i will like the result (neither the price, nor the methods).

So, has anybody ever crafted an exact mahogany replacement?
I found a place that has 2x12 honduran mahogany to piece together like the orginal.
Does anybody know what the drift pins (between two panels) were made of? Were they mahogany drift pins or bronze. I am not talking about the bolts/screws that come from the rudder stock, but the pins between two panels.

much gras-

IMCO here.
338 had a fiberglass rudder with s.s. shaft. It obviously had been on the boat awhile.
I had to recast the rudder shoe (there is pulenty on That here! Type yer favorite werds into the 'search' option.) because there was galvanic corrosion on the side of the shoe the zinc was on. The side of the shoe was also crusted with zinc. So I don't what happened. It is entirely possible that the damage to the shoe occured befor the substitute rudder had been installed. I assumed it was the two different metals.

Merely conjecture: but if Bristol Bronze, anyway, says the original rudder shaft was manganese bronze, my assumption is that the bolts or rod going thru the shaft holding the planks together were the more common silicon. Don't know that Pearson would have used manganese rod. Right? If there is a corrosion problem at the bolt and shaft juncture, it must be pretty unusual, as the bronze alloys are together on the galvanic scale.

Others vocal on the site here have made rudders different from the original. IMHO if you have to depend on somebody else to make the rudder I would go as near as you can to the original design. No epoxy, no glass. Since it sounds like you have the OB version, a straight thru version of the shaft would make for a very strong rudder. After you give the carpenter the plans from the Manual I would ask to see a full scale drawing on mockup showing where the fastenings will go. If all-thread is decided on I certainly would thread it into the shaft. You'ld have the machinist do the threading in the shaft to match the rod.

It is important that the keyway for the tiller head is exactly on line with the rudder blade. I found an (Edson, I think) tiller head that had the keyway on the opposite side of the original. So I had the machinist mill keyways fore and aft on the top of the shaft.

The original rudder is still active on many A/Cs. Maybe no upgrade is needed for the traditionalist. Yes, use Honduras mahogany or Burmese teak.

I like your idea of threading the bolts directly into the shaft.

We'll see if i can convince the carpenter to make a new one just like the old. my guess that my financier (the wife) will just want the cheapest method.

Capt Mrgnstrn,
The guy has to layout all the pieces befor putting the rudder together. All the measurements will be known, some people might be more comfortable using rod (more metal for your buck) and threading the ends only.

Depending on the size of the rod, The threaded hole in the shaft could be blind, not all the way thru the shaft. Maybe this is a way of getting more protection for the fastening from the water. using 5200 to get a seal where the wood meets the metal shaft.

I'm just noodling here, it would be great if there was feedback.

In thinking about this 'natural' rudder: you wouldn't glue the pieces together if you had more than one plank - so you have to allow for the swelling of the wood - how much swelling do you allow for? Swelling could create a bow in the blade. Most of the wood rudders I casually see in the yard have this problem. It is my considered opinion (and I have been called on this) that to help avoid the bowing you make the rudder from pieces where you have reversed the grain. If it's cut from one narrow plank you flip the faces when laying out.

But as usual, contradicting myself:
You could 5200 the edges together as a kind of gasket that could possibly give against the clamping of the bolts and swelling of the wood. In other words: I might glue the pieces with say a fat 1/8" gasket of 5200 and not cinch it up with the nuts until it was set. There may be enough give in the rudder as a unit to allow swelling without getting the curve. And 5200 is still keeping the whole kabootle nicely together? Then you grind and sand the blade to final shape.
Just an idea. But this could be a way of isolating the blade fastenings from possible galvanic action.

Question authority (& tradition!):cool:

Here is an example of a replacement rudder. This one came off of Commander # 199. Its covered with bottom paint and dried slime, but otherwise in reasonably good condition.

I don't have any construction details. It was made about 20-25 years ago. I'm not even too sure how the original rudder was lost. I remember hearing stories of a violent grounding in the Fire Island Inlet.

The rudder is made up of two big slabs of wood. I filled the seperation between the boards with sealant at one point, which probably only made the boards seperate some more.

Five long pins secure the wood to the shaft.

The pins go right through the rudder shaft, which is straight, and solid bronze.

There's a notch at the top.

A pin is formed at the bottom

Good Night!!! Can you really lift that rudder by yourself? That's some serious woodage C'Pete.
What do your neighbours think when you bring 'that, that thing' home with you?;)

Capt Cpete,
Whomever made your 'replacement' two decades ago made an exact copy. Looks like it's right out of the Manual.

Looking in from the moniter here at the photos, the wood shows a remarkable lack of cracking at the top and bottom, it could be teak in there.

That separation of the planks reminds me of a trick I was once shown. It is that just befor you put the edge to edge planks together for the last time, you take the block plane and put a very slight concave in the edges. Land carpenters do the same with plank tables that are glued. The idea is to relieve the pressure from the extra swelling in the endgrain. Seems backwards, doesn't it?

A good part of the trailing edge of the rudder could be carved thinner if a narrow piece was glued to the outer plank over the bolts and nuts. In other words another straight piece would be glued on over the boltholes. Just have to be careful when carving to avoid the oversize washer holes. Think this might work? Have to really have Faith in the glue!

CPete, That is a mighty good looking rudder, and it is the exact one (design, straight through shaft) that I'm presently rounding up all of the items needed to build. Still haven't decided how I want to join the wood and shaft. Drilling the shaft really bugs me but I'll bet that it would last another 35 yrs.!

I am looking for a supply source for the 1 inch naval bronze rod; would appreciate any ideas as to a possible supplier!
Jim, Mon' Ke Ne #391

CPete,
Do you still have the Commander rudder? What I'm getting at is that I would love to have the actual length measurement of the one inch rudder shaft on the rudder that you photographed so very well. I'm laying in supplies to build my new rudder in the fall of 2004 follwing the sailing season and just prior us taking her back up to the great lakes.
I would sincerely appreciate receiving the measurement if it's not a problem.
Thanks so much, Jim

Cmdrpete- The exact length of the shaft would be a very useful measurement for me too, for the same reasons. It is one of the few useful measurements that isn't in my manual so it might be nice to have it posted somewhere that can be easily located for future reference. It's seeming like more and more boats are coming of age where the information will be valuable. Length/depth/thickness of rudder would also be handy. Being able to build one without having to haul the boat to take measurements would make the project considerably cheaper.

Tom

For what its worth (and that ain't much) here's a picture my rudder after preping the bottom for some coats of vinylester and then the bottom paint. I didn't put any plastic on the mahogany (left it au naturale). Its way dried out.

I'll take some measurements of that old barn door rudder.

Kent, your rudder looks good. I'm just curious because it doesnt have the two horizontal "straps"(?) on each side, spanning the boards.

A production modification?

Well, the yard got back to me.

stainless steel shaft, with a plate welded edgewise
+
marine plywood sandwiched betwen the plate
+
fiberglass wrapped around the whole thing
+
labor
+
lifting the boat 6' in the air for installation
=
$3000

So I said NO DICE. So now he is going to tell me how much to repair the rudder. A new repair may be years off now.

oh well.

If that ripoff estimate isn't inspiration enough for you to do whatever it takes to learn how to build a rudder yourself, then I guess nothing will!

Rudders are easy--and inexpensive. Even factoring in a new shaft (I hesitate to quote here because prices vary so widely depending on vendor and location and quality, but a new shaft on my Triton a few years ago--including a designed bend, welded ears, and milled boltholes--was about $300), you can build a brand-new rudder yourself for about 1/10 +/- of the cost you were quoted. Obviously, the yard doesn't really want your business--too small a job, apparently, so they figure if you go for the ripoff they can make some easy money.

I favor duplicating the original construction using solid mahogany boards. But there are other ways to do it too. Do whatever pleases you.

Not only do you get to save money, but you can learn new--and apparently very valuable--skills. The only hard part is getting over any mental block you may have about jumping into the project. Again: that quote should be more than enough reason to try!

Good luck.

I replaced my rudder with a single piece of mahogany for $750 a few years ago. It fit like a glove. Beautiful piece of woodwork. Hated to paint it. I then sealed the wood with a clear penetrating sealer. If you want the name of the woodworker, let me know.

In addition to the bolts that go through the shaft into the rudder, my old rudder had three or four rods that went into the rudder horizontally from the aft end. The rudder has worked fine, with no warpage or problem of any kind = and it is still beautiful.

Remember that the Triton shares the same rudder, so that might be another source for you.

$3,000? Ykes? That is almost as bad as the Marina that wanted $3,000 to paint my stripped spars. No deal.

It isn't that I don't have the guts to try to build my own rudder.
It is that I don't seem to have them time, what with redecorating our guest bedroom as a nursery, the list of other home projects.
But we'll see how things shape up in a few months.

The Triton rudder is definitely different than the one pictured above. Whether or not a rudder from a Triton could be used in place of the Ariel rudder is another question, but the shape is somewhat different--mostly at the top. Probably some minor modification would make it work if necessary, if one happened to be lying around.

As it happens, I have a spare Triton rudder here, from hull #100. It's warped and, frankly, pretty crappy, but if you're interested let me know. I have no use for it other than as a rough pattern.

In actuality the Triton rudder may be quite different in construction from the A/C. The few Triton's I've seen here are strapped rather than thru bolted. Haven't measured, but the aperture may be different, the machining reduction at the bottom of the shaft that goes into the shoe may be different, the angle of the keel/rudder may be different between the two hulls, leading to alterations in profile.

Would be good to know for the record what the actual similarities are.. And what you have to do to put a Triton rudderr on an A/C?

Making a rudder would not be too difficult if you started with an already machined shaft (and bent if you are inboard,) including whatever style bolt holes in the shaft for the blade.

I don't know of this Triton rudder is original: it had welded bronze straps bent around the shaft in a U-shape out onto the planks. Aside from the hydrodynamic problems with the straps being proud of the blade and the fastening heads, it seems this style would make it easy to replace the wood - you could almost do it with the rudder in the boat.
[This blade was very thin (about the width of the shaft: 1"), fatter wood and you'ld dap the straps in for a smoother finish. Either way, since the U-straps are right angle to the shaft, the wood would slip in or out pretty easy! I think it's a good idea.]

My understanding that the two rudders were either identical or substantially the same came from Rudy (whatever his last name was) who worked for Pearson and acquired the parts inventory from Pierson when they bit the dust. I do not vouch for it myself, since he told me he didn't have any Triton rudders either.

In regard to time, the concept of stripping a used boat is a real time burner - and all you wind up with are well used parts. It is not a good deal if time is in short supply - and I speak from experience in stripping the parts off my Ariel (including the rudder).

Triton Rudder is WAAAAYYYYY Different. Way bigger, different shape, doesn't hang on the boat the same.

Just make a new one. Honest.

Here's some measurements of that replacement rudder. At the shaft, the wood is rounded out and slightly overlaps the shaft. I measured the width of the rudder from the outside of the shaft.

The original rudder on Commander # 200 is slightly shorter (42 1/2) and wider (18) than this rudder.

The shaft is milled out the same as the plan in the Manual: key at top (2 x 1/4) and pin at bottom (3/4 x 3/4).

There's always some variation between boats, so I would double-check these measurements against the rudder you have.

Pete:

How many rods do you show through your rudder (Other than the screws mounting the rudder to the shaft? Do the drawings reflect the actual number?

CPete,
Thanks so much for taking your time to measure your extra rudder! These measurements will be worth a million bucks to me since I can lay in supplies and make sure that I order enough of everything so that when I bring #391 back to my home in the fall of 2004 I can get on with the job. I can already have the blade finished, and the 1" bronze ready to cut to the exact length, etc.
Best wishes and Happy Holidays!
Jim

The three-piece (plank) design is what commander #92 has. That will be my scheme for replacement this winter, duplicating as closely as possible the original design.

I have inquired to the wooden boat forum regarding wood species, and Honduran mahogany seems to be the best compromise between the original "phillipine" (a little less expensive than Hoduran) and the best material for a rudder, east indian teak.

The thread is at:

http://media5.hypernet.com/cgi-bin/U...c;f=1;t=008475

More after the new year when I get started...

Last year, as I recall, there was interesting informationon this forum submitted by Mike Goodwin about woods related to cockpit coamings, which included an explanation of the difference between Honduran and Phillipine Mahogany (the latter being not a mahogany, but a genre of cedar, as I recall). It might be interesting for you review that (Dec. 2, 2002)

Theis,

Those 5 rods go right through both pieces of wood and through the shaft. A rough outline of their placement is below.

Seems a robust construction method. However, as ebb noted, this style doesn't have a tapered trailing edge. You would need to create that somehow if you wanted it.

I came across an article on rudders. A bit too technical for me

http://www.boat-links.com/foils.html

I have to tell you why your information is so interesting. You would think that Pearson had a routine - a system for making their rudders, but it seems to wander all over the lot.

When I mentioned to Bill that there were rods through Solsken's rudder, he asserted, unequivocally, that Pearson never put rods through their rudders and that had to have been done by one of the previous owners (in my case there was only one previous owner, and he didn't do it). So the issue was on the table, and I opined that folding my tent to better authority was the appropriate response.

So now you come with five rods - and the rods go right through the shaft (my rods do not - and there are only three of them as I recall).

I do have three bolts (I think that is correct) in addition to the rods that extend through the shaft into the rudder, and one screw - each extending to about the middle of the rudder (the nut and washer are embedded in a cut out in the wood rudder.

Like others, my original rudder was made of three pieces - which, over time separated. The outside piece was largely held on by the rods because the bolts did not extend into it.

So - the point is that there appears to have been considerable variation in the way these rudders were assembled. For reference, Solsken in #82 built at the end of 1982 - or so I have been led to believe.

Pete's rudder diagrams are of his REPLACEMENT rudder, not an original. Correct me if I am wrong. They did not follow the original design in number of planks or fastener types and locations. See the diagram in the manual which does not show the drift pins.

The drift pins (rods) are a common feature of these traditional plank rudders. Mine has three and they do not go through the rudder shaft.

The drawing in the Manual shows the original rudder was attached with (3) 6" bolts and (3) 5" wood screws. It also says the rudder is "solid mahogany."

I've only seen rudders that had the three planks. The original rudder on my Commander 200 looks about the same as Dave Bogle's. Here's a pic, taken just after haulout.

You see those horizontal slats, which don't appear on some rudders, like Kent's