Crack in Transom
- Thread starter Tucker
- Start date
Vero, you went on the inside to remove the wood and cut into the deck....any reason why you didn't want to cut from the outside and just leave 3-4 inches of original glass to bond to? Rebuilding that deck looks like a lot of cosmetic work to make it match....PS, cool little dog..does he like the water?
Rich, those pics are a bit deceiving. The section of deckfloor that I cut out is saved and will be returned to its' exact location after transom rebuild. I f you look closely at pic of removed floor area, you'll notice that the only areas cut are from removable panel in rear floor to sides, and then up to compartment openings. Then short area up and under gunnels.
The removed deck section is "L" shaped in the rear, and goes up transom to create inner lip of the notched area on transom.
Here is a pic before I removed it.
What this means is that the only areas of repair that are visible when complete are the two approximately one foot floor cuts from sides to panel opening, and another two one foot cuts up sides of rear compartments. All other fiberglass work will be covered by the "L" area of removed section. The floor cut area is also where cables, harnesses, fuel lines, etc., lay going into motors, and view is blocked by flip-up/flip-down rear cockpit panel. If I can get a good color mix on gelcoat placed over cut repairs, you won't be able to find them.
Also, the exterior transom fiberglass has no cracks or damage. It will clean up fine. I don't believe I'm skillfull enough to replicate it, but I'm sure I can handle securely reinstalling the rear deck area. That exterior fiberglass is much thicker and refined compared to the hidden layers of fiberglass on the interior of transom.
Little dog is "Nina". She actually hasn't been out on the water with us yet. Mike
The removed deck section is "L" shaped in the rear, and goes up transom to create inner lip of the notched area on transom.
Here is a pic before I removed it.
What this means is that the only areas of repair that are visible when complete are the two approximately one foot floor cuts from sides to panel opening, and another two one foot cuts up sides of rear compartments. All other fiberglass work will be covered by the "L" area of removed section. The floor cut area is also where cables, harnesses, fuel lines, etc., lay going into motors, and view is blocked by flip-up/flip-down rear cockpit panel. If I can get a good color mix on gelcoat placed over cut repairs, you won't be able to find them.
Also, the exterior transom fiberglass has no cracks or damage. It will clean up fine. I don't believe I'm skillfull enough to replicate it, but I'm sure I can handle securely reinstalling the rear deck area. That exterior fiberglass is much thicker and refined compared to the hidden layers of fiberglass on the interior of transom.
Little dog is "Nina". She actually hasn't been out on the water with us yet. Mike
Tucker said:
I would be interested to know as well Tucker. When did Grady start glassing over that area at the transom and just put the trim strip on for cosmetic reasons? I am looking at a few 04' to 07' models and one has a bent aluminum strip back there. Concerned if the water got under there. But if it was glassed I would not be worried as much.
Wow. Rotten wood core in glass layup is a real drag.
BTW, Grady does not use vinylester resin as they cannot get an EPA variance - or so I have surmised, based on data and correspondence I found on a search for that type of resin.
I also found that proper layup has as much to do with osmosis damage thru a polyester gel coat as the actual gel coat material. Here's where construction knowledge shows up; Grady uses woven roving layers, well-squeegeed out, Bayliner uses a chopper gun ( or used to anyway). The former has very little resin in the layup, the latter a lot. Resin is not all that strong, and it's brittle, like glass. Grady's layup looks like what we used to see in big off-shore sailing vessels. I have not seen that type of construction typically in modern inshore power craft. It's a lot more hand work, takes a lot more time in the layup process. I remember some of those old cheaply built boats where the gelcoat would just fall off the hull in sheets.
While I'm sorry to see transom core deterioration, try owning a 40' boat that's completely constructed of wood! Been there, done that. :mrgreen:
In fact, I still have a huge tool box of hand tools I brought from Seattle almost 20 years ago. I keep thinking of putting them out on ebay, but wifey says I should wait 'till at least after retirement in case I want to build another boat. Problem is, the older I get, the less I want to 'work' on boats, and the more I just want to go fish and drink beer. :wink:
EDIT: Hey - post 601! What a great site!
BTW, Grady does not use vinylester resin as they cannot get an EPA variance - or so I have surmised, based on data and correspondence I found on a search for that type of resin.
I also found that proper layup has as much to do with osmosis damage thru a polyester gel coat as the actual gel coat material. Here's where construction knowledge shows up; Grady uses woven roving layers, well-squeegeed out, Bayliner uses a chopper gun ( or used to anyway). The former has very little resin in the layup, the latter a lot. Resin is not all that strong, and it's brittle, like glass. Grady's layup looks like what we used to see in big off-shore sailing vessels. I have not seen that type of construction typically in modern inshore power craft. It's a lot more hand work, takes a lot more time in the layup process. I remember some of those old cheaply built boats where the gelcoat would just fall off the hull in sheets.
While I'm sorry to see transom core deterioration, try owning a 40' boat that's completely constructed of wood! Been there, done that. :mrgreen:
In fact, I still have a huge tool box of hand tools I brought from Seattle almost 20 years ago. I keep thinking of putting them out on ebay, but wifey says I should wait 'till at least after retirement in case I want to build another boat. Problem is, the older I get, the less I want to 'work' on boats, and the more I just want to go fish and drink beer. :wink:
EDIT: Hey - post 601! What a great site!
Got my answer from Grady on an 04' I am looking at regarding the transom trim piece. He said the trim piece on the transom is there to hide the rough seem between the transom and top cap. They said it was glassed there and the piece is for protection from the motor. Cosmetic I guess. He did say to be sure the screws were sealed because they may be thru the glass into the wood. Also recommended as a precation to run a bead of caulk along the bottom edge. Hope this helps. I feel a little better now.
CJ, why would they need a an EPA variance? Both polyester and vinyl ester are dissolved in styrene and use MEKP....and unless they are going over an emissions limit due to higher production why would the EPA care? With all those boat builders in NC of which many use VE, GW would be the ones limited by the EPA? Plus many VE's are MACT compliant, passing EPA minimum standards for emissions.....I work with EPA/DEP regs in regards to emission limits....if we went to the State and said we needed to switch chemistry in order to compete and keep jobs local, they would find a way for us to do it.....it just doesn't sound right but maybe there's more to this than I'm understanding....
richie rich said:
Maybe I just missed the meaning of the variance that allowed them to spray a very limited amount of vinylesters. I'll see if I can find it again.
If that's the case, then I'm not sure why they wouldn't go that way, especially for the larger hulls that would obviously wet-store.
I was doing research when we were talking about barrier coats before bottom paint on new hulls.
________________________________________________________
EDIT: Okay, I think this is the EPA permit I found on their gel-coat resin limits. It is a 2005 draft, so I don't even know if it's valid or not.
If you look on page 11, section d/iii you'll find that they are limited to 5% of all resin production to be vinylester resins.
http://daq.state.nc.us/permits/draft_pe ... 192005.pdf
I don't know for sure if this is a limiting factor or not for them, I just made that assumption when I ran across this data. I've been known to jump to conclusions with limited information. If anyone can shed more light on the subject I'm sure we would all be interested.
EDIT-2: Here is the 2007 final permit letter from the state of NC for Grady White Boats. It is quite clear that vinylester resins cannot comprise more than 5% of their resin applications. However it does say that it does not limit a blend of vinylester and polyester resins for spray-on gel coat.
http://daq.state.nc.us/permits/TV_permits/Grady_t09.pdf
I also found some boat reports saying that the new Chesapeak has a blended polyester-vinylester gelcoat on the bottom surfaces.
Hmmm...so there you go. Still not sure what it all means, but there's some reading for anyone that's interested.
transom crack
I'm considering the purchase of '93 Gulfstream where there is a crack in the transom's gelcoat in the corner of the notch,on both the inner and outer skin.
I'm guessing that water must have gotten under the aluminum strip on top ?
We're weighing our options IF we buy this Hull, either having it repaired the traditional way at a shop, or doing it the sea-cast / Nidacore method ??
Has anyone here done the hollow-out and pour fix ??
I'ts supposed to be way stronger than wood and won't absorb water and still float.
the boat wouldn't be used till next season anyway ...
thanks,
Bill
I'm considering the purchase of '93 Gulfstream where there is a crack in the transom's gelcoat in the corner of the notch,on both the inner and outer skin.
I'm guessing that water must have gotten under the aluminum strip on top ?
We're weighing our options IF we buy this Hull, either having it repaired the traditional way at a shop, or doing it the sea-cast / Nidacore method ??
Has anyone here done the hollow-out and pour fix ??
I'ts supposed to be way stronger than wood and won't absorb water and still float.
the boat wouldn't be used till next season anyway ...
thanks,
Bill
Billfish33, I considered doing the hollow-out and pour-in seacast or similiar repair, and actually that was my original plan. With that in mind I used a dremel to cut the 2"-2 1/4" top gelcoated section off of notched transom area so I could chisel and cut out the bad wood sandwiched inside of transom. Well, thats a lot easier said than done. Bad wood went both left and right, up and down, and completely impossible to get at and remove from that slotted area where engines mount. Plus, the moisture wicks up the sides of transom damaging the wood in transom that is higher than the outboard mounting area.
I also thoroughly researched this hollow & pour type repair as compared to a more conventional one. Some of the comments I found on the hollow and pour type repair are:
1. As stated above, difficult to impossible to remove all damaged wood from transom without removing either inside or outside fiberglass.
2. Damage in transom could be higher on sides of notched area, making pouring into these areas questionable.
3. If any moisture or bad wood remains in transom, these poured mixes will not not bond to these areas, creating weak spots in transom.
4. Poured-type transom repairs are very brittle and subject to cracking if bumped hard, or outboard strikes bottom/object.
Now before anyone starts arguing with me about the above listed comments, be advised these are not comments I am making, they are comments I found while doing extensive research on how would be the best way for me to repair my transom. I have no firsthand knowledge of the use of these pour-in transom products.
I knew that any way you look at it, it was going to be a BIG project. I decided that if I was going to undertake this project, I wanted to be 100% confident that it would be at least as good as new, if not better. Thats why, after digging out transom with what started with chisels and scrapers, and ended with chainsaw and sharpened crowbars, I decided to just go ahead and do the job right.
During my research of transom repairs, I came across a place nearby to me in Fl that specializes in these type repairs as well as boatbuilding plans, epoxy materials, etc.. I got on their forum and found tons of info on these type repairs. I'm not sure if I should list the name here because of this forums regs, but if anyone wants it, just PM me and I've give it to you.
I also thoroughly researched this hollow & pour type repair as compared to a more conventional one. Some of the comments I found on the hollow and pour type repair are:
1. As stated above, difficult to impossible to remove all damaged wood from transom without removing either inside or outside fiberglass.
2. Damage in transom could be higher on sides of notched area, making pouring into these areas questionable.
3. If any moisture or bad wood remains in transom, these poured mixes will not not bond to these areas, creating weak spots in transom.
4. Poured-type transom repairs are very brittle and subject to cracking if bumped hard, or outboard strikes bottom/object.
Now before anyone starts arguing with me about the above listed comments, be advised these are not comments I am making, they are comments I found while doing extensive research on how would be the best way for me to repair my transom. I have no firsthand knowledge of the use of these pour-in transom products.
I knew that any way you look at it, it was going to be a BIG project. I decided that if I was going to undertake this project, I wanted to be 100% confident that it would be at least as good as new, if not better. Thats why, after digging out transom with what started with chisels and scrapers, and ended with chainsaw and sharpened crowbars, I decided to just go ahead and do the job right.
During my research of transom repairs, I came across a place nearby to me in Fl that specializes in these type repairs as well as boatbuilding plans, epoxy materials, etc.. I got on their forum and found tons of info on these type repairs. I'm not sure if I should list the name here because of this forums regs, but if anyone wants it, just PM me and I've give it to you.
CJ, if I read this correctly, the 5% you're referring to is the amount that is exempt from reporting, not the amount they can emit. These guys are allowed to dump 366lbs of styrene per hour into the atmosphere!!!!! Thats insane!!! They have no thermal or catalytic oxidizer to control any of these emissions including cleaning solvents, chlorinated solvents and aromatics from the 3M adhesive totalling 250 tons a year!! The State of CT would shut my plant down tomorrow if we did this....I'm in shock that the Feds even allow this, but it must be eligible due to the open mold techniques of boat building. Maybe thats why many boat builders are going to infusion molding so there are no emissions and less EPA regulations to deal with. But based on this application, they can switch to VE any time they want as long as they stay within the 366/hr. The 5% exemption shows the EPA likes it so much that this amount doesn't have to be reported on their yearly emission statement. I don't find an excuse here, the permit is written specifically for what they want to do...it is very lax as compared to many industries.
It's my belief that the "brittle" arguement is one of the most legitimate arguements against foam/composite transoms. It's also one of the reasons that many composite transom builders use Armstrong engine brackets. The aluminum bracket spreads the impact force over the entire transom. I have seen two composite notch transoms completely shattered from the motors hitting rocks. When the top transom caps were removed, it looked like a Charleston Chew after it had been in the freezer and whacked on the table. You can be sure the hull warranty won't cover the issue either seeing as an impact caused the problem.
So strength may be there in composites but impact resistance seems to be an issue and is something that certainly happens pretty often in boating.
So strength may be there in composites but impact resistance seems to be an issue and is something that certainly happens pretty often in boating.