• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

hmanko

J80 Loses Keel

114 posts in this topic

It was blowing 30 knots, and perhaps the amount of time she spent on a broach did it in. Nobody wants this to happen to themselves or another competitor.

 

 

Keel_Loss_.mov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bummer, no fun at all. :(

 

at least it floats........

 

It was blowing 30 knots, and perhaps the amount of time she spent on a broach did it in. Nobody wants this to happen to themselves or another competitor.

Keel_Loss_.mov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, well run event with great race committee work. Too bad this overshadows it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously you don't seem to have a quality boat there.

Obviously, the J80 must have had a shit of a designer.

 

Let me tell you what my Dad told me about age of Nine when I was starting to sail.

 

 

...If the wind blows too hard, the sails will blow out, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If it's blowing even harder, and you have storm sails out, then the mast will go, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If you get picked up and dumped by a fucking giant wave, the sails will go, the mast will go, but that's OK, the keel will right the boat.

 

....The keel will never, ever come off the boat unless you hit a whale or a rock very, very , very hard, in which case it's going to be the least of your problems, or unless you are to criminally insane to do even the bare minimum of maintenance on it.

 

 

Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously you don't seem to have a quality boat there.

Obviously, the J80 must have had a shit of a designer.

 

Let me tell you what my Dad told me about age of Nine when I was starting to sail.

...If the wind blows too hard, the sails will blow out, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If it's blowing even harder, and you have storm sails out, then the mast will go, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If you get picked up and dumped by a fucking giant wave, the sails will go, the mast will go, but that's OK, the keel will right the boat.

 

....The keel will never, ever come off the boat unless you hit a whale or a rock very, very , very hard, in which case it's going to be the least of your problems, or unless you are to criminally insane to do even the bare minimum of maintenance on it.

Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

Dude, I like the failure mode progression, it makes sense. But your closing statement/question suggests that "some of [sA's] retards" allow designers to build sport boats poorly. That doesn't make sense. SA's retards are responsible for a lot of anarchy, but not for that..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously you don't seem to have a quality boat there.

Obviously, the J80 must have had a shit of a designer.

 

Let me tell you what my Dad told me about age of Nine when I was starting to sail.

...If the wind blows too hard, the sails will blow out, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If it's blowing even harder, and you have storm sails out, then the mast will go, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If you get picked up and dumped by a fucking giant wave, the sails will go, the mast will go, but that's OK, the keel will right the boat.

 

....The keel will never, ever come off the boat unless you hit a whale or a rock very, very , very hard, in which case it's going to be the least of your problems, or unless you are to criminally insane to do even the bare minimum of maintenance on it.

Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

 

You are a total dumbass. There are over 1000 J80's built and this is the first one that I know of that has had a keel problem. Your dad sailed in a different time. He has good advice for people sailing Island Packets or something. Not for anything that will break the elusive 5kn barrier. Most of you have seen this but I'll whore it out again for this guy that is a total hater.

 

http://youtube.com/results?search_query=j8...mp;search_type=

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are a total dumbass. There are over 1000 J80's built and this is the first one that I know of that has had a keel problem. Your dad sailed in a different time. He has good advice for people sailing Island Packets or something. Not for anything that will break the elusive 5kn barrier. Most of you have seen this but I'll whore it out again for this guy that is a total hater.

 

http://youtube.com/results?search_query=j8...mp;search_type=

 

 

x2

 

J80's are great boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cannot download the movie for some reason. Anyone know the cause of the keel loss? I have owned and raced J-80's since 2000 and never had a moment when I felt unsafe or in any danger, regardless of the conditions. These builts are built to handle very tough conditions - in fact two guys sailed one acress the Atlantic earlier this year and encountered no problems even in very adverse weather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would love pics of the stubbie. I agree, these boats are brick shithouses and loosing a keel is very odd. Anyone know the hull #?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would love pics of the stubbie. I agree, these boats are brick shithouses and loosing a keel is very odd. Anyone know the hull #?

Its hull number 21 from the early 90s. There is no stub as the keel didn't break off at the sump. The whole sump broke off. The bottom is smooth at this point with an 8 inch wide by 4 foot long hole in the bottom and peeled fiberglass on both sides of the hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would love pics of the stubbie. I agree, these boats are brick shithouses and loosing a keel is very odd. Anyone know the hull #?

 

Check out the other thread about the same boat. Decent pics there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A keel should never ever fall or break off. The keel failures are no different than airplane wing failures or jet engines falling off in flight. When that happens the entire fleet is grounded until the industry figures our why the first one failed. We should do the same with sailing. No boats of the types involved in the rudder and keel failure this week should be leaving the dock until we agree on why it happened and how to correct the problems that in my opinion always start with the design.

 

 

The chance of death is too great to deal with this in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
x2

 

J80's are great boats.

 

Well, maybe nopt this one then so much.

 

Keel should never leave the boat on a monohull; just like a multi should never sink.

 

Come on, J-boats and or TPI have a hell of a string going on...

 

These are not some extreme VO70s.

 

The freaking keel should stay attached the boat. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again this thread is useless without pics. There is a root cause to this failure and bashing JBoats will not find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cant open video. any chance of making it compatible with windows media?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, maybe nopt this one then so much.

 

Keel should never leave the boat on a monohull; just like a multi should never sink.

 

Come on, J-boats and or TPI have a hell of a string going on...

 

These are not some extreme VO70s.

 

The freaking keel should stay attached the boat. :blink:

 

Since it is the only 80 in a string of over 1000 of them that has had a keel prob and it is one of the earliest ones built and has been raced since it was built....... I'd say it is either a really weird fluke, it was previously grounded hard or dropped from a lift, or it has just had poor care and was beat all it's life.

 

I owned 8 really high milage Volvos before I had one with engine problems. It was just a poorly treated car. I still drive Volvos. I would have no problem with sailing any J80 anyplace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since it is the only 80 in a string of over 1000 of them that has had a keel prob and it is one of the earliest ones built and has been raced since it was built....... I'd say it is either a really weird fluke, it was previously grounded hard or dropped from a lift, or it has just had poor care and was beat all it's life.

 

I owned 8 really high milage Volvos before I had one with engine problems. It was just a poorly treated car. I still drive Volvos. I would have no problem with sailing any J80 anyplace.

I'm not a J-boat hater.

 

Think.

 

What were you wearing and what were conditions and water temp when you went flying down the bay. Imagine if...

 

One is one too many, the pics don't suggest poor care, and J-boats and TPI have a string going don't they. Too many problems across range of J-boats designs/TPI mfg for there not to be some root cause other than grounding or poor care I'll bet.

 

At some point you have to conclude where there is smoke...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously you don't seem to have a quality boat there.

Obviously, the J80 must have had a shit of a designer.

 

Let me tell you what my Dad told me about age of Nine when I was starting to sail.

...If the wind blows too hard, the sails will blow out, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If it's blowing even harder, and you have storm sails out, then the mast will go, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If you get picked up and dumped by a fucking giant wave, the sails will go, the mast will go, but that's OK, the keel will right the boat.

 

....The keel will never, ever come off the boat unless you hit a whale or a rock very, very , very hard, in which case it's going to be the least of your problems, or unless you are to criminally insane to do even the bare minimum of maintenance on it.

Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

 

What did you dad sail, a Hinkley. Yeah that'll get you roud the cans fast. Just in case you did'nt know the J80 is a perfomance design with a limited life span not a tub that is ofshore capable. Jeesss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah its completely normal for the keel to fall off boats all the time... lol. But shouldn't the deck peel off first cause if it doesn't how can the rest of the hull delaminate as its meant too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at those pics it looks like delamination was the probable cause of the failure.

 

What caused the delam?

  • Poor layup? Kind of doubtful given the age of the boat.
  • Prior grounding not repaired properly? Maybe.
  • Design flaw? Doubtful.

Will Museler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the J80 SCRIMP'ed? We've just done a bunch of exploratory surgery on the sump of a J160 and it had major defects in the infusion that led to major defects in the keel sump. It is a non-trivial problem to infuse the sump on these boats. You'll never hear it from TPI, but I'd bet they have changed their infusion process and lamination schedule around that since they have lost all these keels on every different flavor of J-Sprit boat they build.

 

Problem is that if the problem is not caught on the factory floor, there is no reasonable way for a buyer to know if there is a latent defect that could one day lead to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks an awful lot like the same problem that the J120s (and at least one 124) and some 109s have been having as documented on SA. Difference was the bigger boats caught it earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the J80 SCRIMP'ed? We've just done a bunch of exploratory surgery on the sump of a J160 and it had major defects in the infusion that led to major defects in the keel sump. It is a non-trivial problem to infuse the sump on these boats. You'll never hear it from TPI, but I'd bet they have changed their infusion process and lamination schedule around that since they have lost all these keels on every different flavor of J-Sprit boat they build.

 

Problem is that if the problem is not caught on the factory floor, there is no reasonable way for a buyer to know if there is a latent defect that could one day lead to this.

 

 

I'm guessing the age of this one is non scrimp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah its completely normal for the keel to fall off boats all the time... lol. But shouldn't the deck peel off first cause if it doesn't how can the rest of the hull delaminate as its meant too?

Nobody is saying that it is normal, but everyone is jumping to conclusions. This is a 15 year old boat and although Tom has had the boat many years, he is not the original owner. This isn't like those Megles 30s right out of the box when their keels fell off. It's entirely possible that this boat might have a history that my give a clue as to why this happened. I'm sure, in time they'll figure out why and how this happened and I'm sure J Boats is as anxious to know as anybody. There are 1000 J 80s out there including the one where those 2 nuts sailed accross the Atlantic. This is the first one that this has happened to. Lets see what they find out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not a J-boat hater.

 

Think.

 

What were you wearing and what were conditions and water temp when you went flying down the bay. Imagine if...

 

One is one too many, the pics don't suggest poor care, and J-boats and TPI have a string going don't they. Too many problems across range of J-boats designs/TPI mfg for there not to be some root cause other than grounding or poor care I'll bet.

 

At some point you have to conclude where there is smoke...

 

 

You're looking at a wide range of J boats having keel problems. 109's and 124's having some problems has absolutely nothing to do with a pre scrimp 80 having a problem. Also, as I've pointed out before..........more than 1000 J80s out there sailing around and only one has had a keel issue. I think it's that particular 80. Not all 80s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're looking at a wide range of J boats having keel problems. 109's and 124's having some problems has absolutely nothing to do with a pre scrimp 80 having a problem. Also, as I've pointed out before..........more than 1000 J80s out there sailing around and only one has had a keel issue. I think it's that particular 80. Not all 80s.

Yea, I agree. I'm not suggesting a problem with all 80s. But I am saying that too many J-boats pre and post scrimp that have come out of TPI have had keel problems for all of them to be grounding or poor care problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely a pre-SCRIMP boat. Obviously an isolated incident given the number of 80's sailing for many years with no problems. I am willing to bet there is more to the story and it will eventually come out. I too am sure that J boats is keen to find the cause. They made good on a damaged part of my boat when it was 8 years old after factory testing determined it was a manufacturing defect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the risk of being flamed out, who was the arbitration against?

Against the insurance company that denied the claim when the keel fell off in 30 knots and rough seas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the risk of being flamed out, who was the arbitration against?

Against the insurance company that denied the claim when the keel fell off in 30 knots and rough seas.

 

Interesting. Any info on what the insurance Co. determined the cause of loss to be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the risk of being flamed out, who was the arbitration against?

Against the insurance company that denied the claim when the keel fell off in 30 knots and rough seas.

 

Interesting. Any info on what the insurance Co. determined the cause of loss to be?

No info yet. The insurance companies OPINION was that the failure was caused by delamination over a long period of time that the owner should have seen. This, in spite of the fact that the owner presented maintenence reciepts which had included a complete bottom job the year before. The loss was caused by the boat being on its side for an extended period of time in 30 knot winds and big waves. The boat bounced up and down repeatedly until the keel broke off. The boat had been very well cared for. It was a shame the company denied the claim and it took a year and a half for justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there another one that lost it's keel coming into San Francisco bay last year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't there another one that lost it's keel coming into San Francisco bay last year?

 

 

YES - the guys got lucky and were rescued in the dark outside the GG while hanging onto the upturned hull. From all reports sounded to be the exact same sort of failure hull skins peeled away and the keel made a fast exit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't there another one that lost it's keel coming into San Francisco bay last year?

 

 

YES - the guys got lucky and were rescued in the dark outside the GG while hanging onto the upturned hull. From all reports sounded to be the exact same sort of failure hull skins peeled away and the keel made a fast exit.

 

 

This is becoming a pattern. How many is this in total? I think I recall at least 4 over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't there another one that lost it's keel coming into San Francisco bay last year?

 

 

YES - the guys got lucky and were rescued in the dark outside the GG while hanging onto the upturned hull. From all reports sounded to be the exact same sort of failure hull skins peeled away and the keel made a fast exit.

 

 

This is becoming a pattern. How many is this in total? I think I recall at least 4 over the years.

I believe the total is now two. The insurance company that incorrectly denied the claim is International Marine Underwriters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously you don't seem to have a quality boat there.

Obviously, the J80 must have had a shit of a designer.

 

Let me tell you what my Dad told me about age of Nine when I was starting to sail.

...If the wind blows too hard, the sails will blow out, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If it's blowing even harder, and you have storm sails out, then the mast will go, and the keel will right the boat.

 

...If you get picked up and dumped by a fucking giant wave, the sails will go, the mast will go, but that's OK, the keel will right the boat.

 

....The keel will never, ever come off the boat unless you hit a whale or a rock very, very , very hard, in which case it's going to be the least of your problems, or unless you are to criminally insane to do even the bare minimum of maintenance on it.

Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

 

You are a total dumbass. There are over 1000 J80's built and this is the first one that I know of that has had a keel problem. Your dad sailed in a different time. He has good advice for people sailing Island Packets or something. Not for anything that will break the elusive 5kn barrier. Most of you have seen this but I'll whore it out again for this guy that is a total hater.

 

http://youtube.com/results?search_query=j8...mp;search_type=

 

Since the actual count is apparently two, and using your own math, it is like: "Over a million Mustangs have been built, and only 2000 of them have had all four wheels fall off at freeway speeds. What's the problem?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously you don't seem to have a quality boat there.

Obviously, the J80 must have had a shit of a designer.

...Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

You are a total dumbass. There are over 1000 J80's built and this is the first one that I know of that has had a keel problem. ...

Since the actual count is apparently two, and using your own math, it is like: "Over a million Mustangs have been built, and only 2000 of them have had all four wheels fall off at freeway speeds. What's the problem?"

I love Js, but if 2000 (or 200 or even 20) Mustangs (or any car) had a failure of that magnitude no matter what the production run, there would be a recall, lawsuits, public outcry, etc., etc. Short of hitting something really hard, keels shouldn't be falling off boats, and given that this has happened a number of times with Js it's fair to ask what's up. Oops, must have dropped my iPhone while I was texting this, cuz the screen just blew out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NoobyDoo,

 

You're smoking crack when you try to compare the auto industry to the marine industry. First, the auto industry builds far, far more (think 100s of thousands) of each model and, therefore, has the ability to do lots more testing of production samples than is possible when building a few hundred of a yacht.

 

Second, how many Pintos were involved in fatal rear-end collisions before Ford decided that perhaps a recall was really less expensive than litigation?

 

Gimme a break!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another thing to think about in this is most speed shops fair the keel and sump down to get to minimal thickness of the foil, if they remove too much material on the sump. If they did not do internal lamination to replace the missing material/account for the now reduced "ibeam" effect of the outer skins the chance of failure would go up a bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you Chicken Little' out there, trying to compare a boat to a car is like comparing a orange to a pumpkin. Sure both are orange but there is a huge difference in the wear and tear of a Yacht vs. a Car. I have raced many a J in my life 24, 105, 109, 130 and never had a worry about their seaworthiness. Sometimes bad things happen no need to circle the wagons wrap yourself in Pillows and cry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All you Chicken Little' out there, trying to compare a boat to a car is like comparing a orange to a pumpkin. Sure both are orange but there is a huge difference in the wear and tear of a Yacht vs. a Car. I have raced many a J in my life 24, 105, 109, 130 and never had a worry about their seaworthiness. Sometimes bad things happen no need to circle the wagons wrap yourself in Pillows and cry.

 

 

Yeah, just what I was thinking. I've raced prob hundreds of J's but have never once raced any of my cars. There is no comparison with anything cuz there isn't any production car that is built in masses that is only gonna be raced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
another thing to think about in this is most speed shops fair the keel and sump down to get to minimal thickness of the foil, if they remove too much material on the sump. If they did not do internal lamination to replace the missing material/account for the now reduced "ibeam" effect of the outer skins the chance of failure would go up a bit

 

This is a little off base. There is no I beam effect because the sump or stub is a monolithic F.R.P. layup with no core material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the distance off centerline of the laminate is the issue, it why you gain strength from a wide section like in a mast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All you Chicken Little' out there, trying to compare a boat to a car is like comparing a orange to a pumpkin. Sure both are orange but there is a huge difference in the wear and tear of a Yacht vs. a Car. I have raced many a J in my life 24, 105, 109, 130 and never had a worry about their seaworthiness. Sometimes bad things happen no need to circle the wagons wrap yourself in Pillows and cry.

 

Besides if this is really bothering you there is a simple fix - don't buy a Jboat ha ha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoobyDoo,

 

You're smoking crack when you try to compare the auto industry to the marine industry. First, the auto industry builds far, far more (think 100s of thousands) of each model and, therefore, has the ability to do lots more testing of production samples than is possible when building a few hundred of a yacht.

 

Second, how many Pintos were involved in fatal rear-end collisions before Ford decided that perhaps a recall was really less expensive than litigation?

 

Gimme a break!

Who's on crack? I didn't make the comparison, I pointed out the fallacy of the comparison.

 

As for Pintos, who's comparing boats and cars now? Anyway, since you brought it up, J Boats ought to learn from Ford's mistake . . . unless you're suggesting more keels need to fall off more boats and some sailors should die before J Boats gives this more than lip service.

 

By the way, I used to have a boat with a sump -- not a J -- and guess what, it had a keel problem, as in keel no longer hanging straight and water coming in due to flexing. Guess what the insurance company told me? "We ain't paying because it's an inherent defect." In hindsight, I'm not sure they were wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A keel should never ever fall or break off. The keel failures are no different than airplane wing failures or jet engines falling off in flight. When that happens the entire fleet is grounded until the industry figures our why the first one failed. We should do the same with sailing. No boats of the types involved in the rudder and keel failure this week should be leaving the dock until we agree on why it happened and how to correct the problems that in my opinion always start with the design.

 

 

The chance of death is too great to deal with this in any way.

 

Realy? How much do you want to pay for these boats that never fail? Do you want to subject your boat to a total teardown every so many miles to assure the design continues to be robust? Grow a brain, sportboats (if you can call a J80 a sportboat) are like sports cars. They are built to a specification in order to be competitive. Should all cars be "grounded" because a Formula 1 car fails during a race? How do you know the designer is at fault? Maybe the boat had been dropped in a past life. Is that the designers fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All you Chicken Little' out there, trying to compare a boat to a car is like comparing a orange to a pumpkin. Sure both are orange but there is a huge difference in the wear and tear of a Yacht vs. a Car. I have raced many a J in my life 24, 105, 109, 130 and never had a worry about their seaworthiness. Sometimes bad things happen no need to circle the wagons wrap yourself in Pillows and cry.

Yeah, just what I was thinking. I've raced prob hundreds of J's but have never once raced any of my cars. There is no comparison with anything cuz there isn't any production car that is built in masses that is only gonna be raced.

You're both missing (and at the same time proving) the point. Production cars are designed and built for tooling to the market, or commuting to work, or taking the kids to soccer, or heading up the highway to visit grandma. They are not designed or built for screaming sideways around corners and through traffic at breakneck speeds with a bunch of other wack jobs in hot pursuit, and that's not how they are ordinarily used. Well, at least not by anyone outside of Oakland. On the other hand, modern sport boats are designed and built precisely for that kind of use, and that's precisely how they are used. It's a simple question of whether the design and construction is adequate for the expected use. From there, it's just an argument over what percentage of the time having the keel fall off comes under the heading "shit happens," and when it gets to the point where "this kind of shit should not be happening." Personally, I don't think a long broach ought to cause the keel to come off, but hey, the pipe is coming around so I'll give it some more thought while I take the next drag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All you Chicken Little' out there, trying to compare a boat to a car is like comparing a orange to a pumpkin. Sure both are orange but there is a huge difference in the wear and tear of a Yacht vs. a Car. I have raced many a J in my life 24, 105, 109, 130 and never had a worry about their seaworthiness. Sometimes bad things happen no need to circle the wagons wrap yourself in Pillows and cry.

 

 

Yeah, just what I was thinking. I've raced prob hundreds of J's but have never once raced any of my cars. There is no comparison with anything cuz there isn't any production car that is built in masses that is only gonna be raced.

 

http://www.fordracingparts.com/mustang/com...ionhomepage.asp

 

Ford has been selling turnkey racecars since 2005.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

Right. The keel that fell off Heat Wave happened way after this. We should be talking about that one instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All you Chicken Little' out there, trying to compare a boat to a car is like comparing a orange to a pumpkin. Sure both are orange but there is a huge difference in the wear and tear of a Yacht vs. a Car. I have raced many a J in my life 24, 105, 109, 130 and never had a worry about their seaworthiness. Sometimes bad things happen no need to circle the wagons wrap yourself in Pillows and cry.

 

 

Yeah, just what I was thinking. I've raced prob hundreds of J's but have never once raced any of my cars. There is no comparison with anything cuz there isn't any production car that is built in masses that is only gonna be raced.

 

http://www.fordracingparts.com/mustang/com...ionhomepage.asp

 

Ford has been selling turnkey racecars since 2005.

 

Race cars come with all sorts of restrictions as to intended use and risk. If you want to compare race cars to race boats there are certainly comparisons, both are stressed beyond design and both are expected to break.

 

That said, you don't expect the frame in a race car to break, unless you have been over the same curb a bunch of times really hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the distance off centerline of the laminate is the issue, it why you gain strength from a wide section like in a mast

 

At the risk of being contrary, that is not quite accurate either. While the laminate structure for the sump/stub is monolithic, the entire sump/stub is hollow and is additionally reinforced by F.R.P. transverse floors. The floors act to increase the torsional stiffness of the entire structure.

 

Personally I do not see any real adverse effects from a standard fairing job, removing too much of the F.R.P. laminate.

 

However, if there was a shear failure of the floors from the hull and sump/stub area, this could well lead to a failure of the F.R.P. structure.

 

Either way the keel should not have failed under the mode of operation that this boat was under at the time of the loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The keel should NEVER (with a emphasis on NEVER) fall off!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoobyDoo,

 

You're smoking crack when you try to compare the auto industry to the marine industry. First, the auto industry builds far, far more (think 100s of thousands) of each model and, therefore, has the ability to do lots more testing of production samples than is possible when building a few hundred of a yacht.

 

Second, how many Pintos were involved in fatal rear-end collisions before Ford decided that perhaps a recall was really less expensive than litigation?

 

Gimme a break!

Who's on crack? I didn't make the comparison, I pointed out the fallacy of the comparison.

 

As for Pintos, who's comparing boats and cars now? Anyway, since you brought it up, J Boats ought to learn from Ford's mistake . . . unless you're suggesting more keels need to fall off more boats and some sailors should die before J Boats gives this more than lip service.

 

By the way, I used to have a boat with a sump -- not a J -- and guess what, it had a keel problem, as in keel no longer hanging straight and water coming in due to flexing. Guess what the insurance company told me? "We ain't paying because it's an inherent defect." In hindsight, I'm not sure they were wrong.

 

Let me guess, C+C?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Personally I do not see any real adverse effects from a standard fairing job, removing too much of the F.R.P. laminate."

I am guessing either you have never really been envolved with composite engeneering, fairing race boats, or you haven't really thought about this. You are correct for a "standard" fairing job which invoves nothing more than sanding to a really smooth surface and probably doesn't even remove all of the gel coat. Many racers will fair the keel, and sump, to a minimum class overall thickness. If the keel started out too thick this may result in actual fibers being removed which WILL result in a loss of strength. This has the potential to be an issue with boats like the J which have a hollow sump that extends down from the hull.

 

If I were to have a boat where any of the actual laminate thickness was sanded away to make the keel profile thinner, I would be concerned. Especially in the area of the keel attachment. I have seen boats where the keel was atleast 1" over class minimum thickness. You don't think that removing 1/2" of material on each side of a hollow sump is not going to adversely effect the strenght?

 

I am not saying that this has happened with the J80, I don't know. I am just saying your statement is a little off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Personally I do not see any real adverse effects from a standard fairing job, removing too much of the F.R.P. laminate."

I am guessing either you have never really been envolved with composite engeneering, fairing race boats, or you haven't really thought about this. You are correct for a "standard" fairing job which invoves nothing more than sanding to a really smooth surface and probably doesn't even remove all of the gel coat. Many racers will fair the keel, and sump, to a minimum class overall thickness. If the keel started out too thick this may result in actual fibers being removed which WILL result in a loss of strength. This has the potential to be an issue with boats like the J which have a hollow sump that extends down from the hull.

 

If I were to have a boat where any of the actual laminate thickness was sanded away to make the keel profile thinner, I would be concerned. Especially in the area of the keel attachment. I have seen boats where the keel was atleast 1" over class minimum thickness. You don't think that removing 1/2" of material on each side of a hollow sump is not going to adversely effect the strenght?

 

I am not saying that this has happened with the J80, I don't know. I am just saying your statement is a little off.

 

 

Having been involved in new build projects of both dinghies and keelboats, re-build projects, commissioning and rigging, delivery and racing, and project management since the early 80's, then Marine Surveying since 1990 and certified since '95, I'd say I have more than a fundamental level of understanding in composites, both as applied in new construction and repair.

 

As a Marine Surveyor, I am also very careful with my language, which is why I qualified my statement with the word standard.

 

I would suggest your understanding to be minimal. Anyone who considers fairing an F.R.P. laminate to include removal of said laminate beyond the veil coat laminate (1/2" in your statement), without replacement of an equivalent material, should not be allowed anywhere near a grinder or peeler, let alone anywhere near the bottom of a sailing boat, racer or cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All right, I realize that my comment re: removing too much F.R.P. material was miscontrued. To be clear, I am stating that I doubt a standard fairing job would remove too much if any F.R.P. laminate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoobyDoo,

 

You're smoking crack when you try to compare the auto industry to the marine industry. First, the auto industry builds far, far more (think 100s of thousands) of each model and, therefore, has the ability to do lots more testing of production samples than is possible when building a few hundred of a yacht.

 

Second, how many Pintos were involved in fatal rear-end collisions before Ford decided that perhaps a recall was really less expensive than litigation?

 

Gimme a break!

Who's on crack? I didn't make the comparison, I pointed out the fallacy of the comparison.

 

As for Pintos, who's comparing boats and cars now? Anyway, since you brought it up, J Boats ought to learn from Ford's mistake . . . unless you're suggesting more keels need to fall off more boats and some sailors should die before J Boats gives this more than lip service.

 

By the way, I used to have a boat with a sump -- not a J -- and guess what, it had a keel problem, as in keel no longer hanging straight and water coming in due to flexing. Guess what the insurance company told me? "We ain't paying because it's an inherent defect." In hindsight, I'm not sure they were wrong.

 

Let me guess, C+C?

Pearson. Built a couple months before they went under.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

THANK YOU! I brought it up because, at the time, many people wanted to know what happened with the arbitration. It took forever, but after a year and a half, the insurance company has been forced to pay their insured. Most companies would have paid right away, but this company chose to play hardball and ultimately lost. I wonder if Heat Wave's claim was paid without having to resort to lots of letters and ultimitely, arbitration. If it was handled properly, lets hear which company that was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

THANK YOU! I brought it up because, at the time, many people wanted to know what happened with the arbitration. It took forever, but after a year and a half, the insurance company has been forced to pay their insured. Most companies would have paid right away, but this company chose to play hardball and ultimately lost. I wonder if Heat Wave's claim was paid without having to resort to lots of letters and ultimitely, arbitration. If it was handled properly, lets hear which company that was.

 

Sounds pretty much par for the course for IMU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so is it safe to sail a J-80 off-shore? latter boats less likley to lose keel? :unsure:

 

It's "Offshore Certified" according to the J-boat's ad-men.

 

Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

And in the '70's Ford told you to take your Pinto for a drive on the freeway in heavy traffic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been several instances of keels falling off in the last few years. The ones I'm aware of where the cause was investigated are the Hooligan in 2007 and the Cynthia Woods in 2008. In both cases the investigation concluded the keel attachment structure was inadequate and did not meet the requirements of the ABS Guide for Building and Classing Offshore Racing Yachts.

 

Does anyone know of any investigations and/or published conclusions regarding the cause of the other keel failures that have occured recently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

Right. The keel that fell off Heat Wave happened way after this. We should be talking about that one instead.

 

 

Ironically it looks the owner of Heatwave replied to the original thread, long before his own keel fell off.

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php...t&p=1724199

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

Right. The keel that fell off Heat Wave happened way after this. We should be talking about that one instead.

 

 

Ironically it looks the owner of Heatwave replied to the original thread, long before his own keel fell off.

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php...t&p=1724199

That would be the previous owner from TX - the boat was sold to a great guy in CA who was devastated by the loss. Heatwave had also been very well maintained with no signs of the impending failure.

 

Congrats on getting the insurance settlement - numbnutz company actions like that just create more lawyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

Right. The keel that fell off Heat Wave happened way after this. We should be talking about that one instead.

 

 

Ironically it looks the owner of Heatwave replied to the original thread, long before his own keel fell off.

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php...t&p=1724199

That would be the previous owner from TX - the boat was sold to a great guy in CA who was devastated by the loss. Heatwave had also been very well maintained with no signs of the impending failure.

 

Congrats on getting the insurance settlement - numbnutz company actions like that just create more lawyers.

 

Thanks for the backstory. Wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so is it safe to sail a J-80 off-shore? latter boats less likley to lose keel?

It's "Offshore Certified" according to the J-boat's ad-men.

Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

And in the '70's Ford told you to take your Pinto for a drive on the freeway in heavy traffic.

I owned a Pinto in the 70's. We called it the "traffic puck". We got no respect when driving that thing. It was brutal riding in rush hour traffic. After a couple of years it looked like Rocky Balbino after a fight. Kind of a lime green color.

 

ford-pinto.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

THANK YOU! I brought it up because, at the time, many people wanted to know what happened with the arbitration. It took forever, but after a year and a half, the insurance company has been forced to pay their insured. Most companies would have paid right away, but this company chose to play hardball and ultimately lost. I wonder if Heat Wave's claim was paid without having to resort to lots of letters and ultimitely, arbitration. If it was handled properly, lets hear which company that was.

It is my understanding that the Heatwave claim was paid in a prompt, professional manner by the insurer (BOAT/US). I did speak to the claims adjuster and he asked some very intelligent questions but I never got the impression he was intending to deny the claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so has j-boats stepped up to the plate and done the right thing, like admit to fuckin' up? :o :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

"In what may be the automotive industry’s greatest irony, NHTSA, the federal agency created from Nader’s consumer advocacy, investigated the Corvair and issued a report in 1971 clearing the car’s design, two years after the car went out of production.

 

Part of Nader’s evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it spin around. Such films were not uncommon. GM also had films showing Ford Econoline pickups standing on their noses under heavy braking."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There have been several instances of keels falling off in the last few years. The ones I'm aware of where the cause was investigated are the Hooligan in 2007 and the Cynthia Woods in 2008. In both cases the investigation concluded the keel attachment structure was inadequate and did not meet the requirements of the ABS Guide for Building and Classing Offshore Racing Yachts.

 

Does anyone know of any investigations and/or published conclusions regarding the cause of the other keel failures that have occured recently?

It may be worth pointing out here (once again) that the ABS Guide is woefully inadequate, has not been updated in 15 years, and does not contemplate the sort of keels now being hung off of cheaply built production boats.

 

A sport boat built with a deep fin that only just made the ABS standard is not one that I would venture further from the dock than swimming distance. Increase the keel attachment strength by about 4X over that, and I am in. This is neither particularly difficult nor heavy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everyone realizes this is an OLD thread that has been bumped to the top so that the final insurance resolution with arbitration result could be published.

 

People - read through the whole thread before posting.

THANK YOU! I brought it up because, at the time, many people wanted to know what happened with the arbitration. It took forever, but after a year and a half, the insurance company has been forced to pay their insured. Most companies would have paid right away, but this company chose to play hardball and ultimately lost. I wonder if Heat Wave's claim was paid without having to resort to lots of letters and ultimitely, arbitration. If it was handled properly, lets hear which company that was.

It is my understanding that the Heatwave claim was paid in a prompt, professional manner by the insurer (BOAT/US). I did speak to the claims adjuster and he asked some very intelligent questions but I never got the impression he was intending to deny the claim.

The Slillagalee claim was paid 15 months after the claim. The insurance company denied the claim but after arbitration, they were forced to pay it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The purpose of Sailing Anarchy is not to create disorder.

 

The purpose of Sailing Anarchy is to preserve disorder.

 

Regards

aa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There have been several instances of keels falling off in the last few years. The ones I'm aware of where the cause was investigated are the Hooligan in 2007 and the Cynthia Woods in 2008. In both cases the investigation concluded the keel attachment structure was inadequate and did not meet the requirements of the ABS Guide for Building and Classing Offshore Racing Yachts.

 

Does anyone know of any investigations and/or published conclusions regarding the cause of the other keel failures that have occured recently?

 

 

Here in Europe the fiasco of Bavaria Match 42's keels comes to mind, but I'm not sure final findings have been published.

 

M - I reckon all the boats were recalled by Bavaria for upgrade at some point, though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A sport boat built with a deep fin that only just made the ABS standard is not one that I would venture further from the dock than swimming distance. Increase the keel attachment strength by about 4X over that, and I am in. This is neither particularly difficult nor heavy.

 

You may not get many chances to sail on a sport boat unless you can swim really far. I agree the ABS standard is light. 1.5X to 2X over ABS for the keel attachment is more in line with good engineering practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

 

I think we have to consider the intent of the design for club racing vs. blue water racing or cruising. A perfomance based craft will have inherent design changes that challenge durability characteristics. Newer racing craft are lighter, faster and may be more prone to catastrophic failure as a result.

 

Oh, and BTW, your dad did not sail a schooner did he? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why the fuck do modern designers try to kill people by fucking with this simple and safe progressive set of failure modes, and more importantly why the fuck do some of you retards allow them to get away with it?

 

I think we have to consider the intent of the design for club racing vs. blue water racing or cruising. A perfomance based craft will have inherent design changes that challenge durability characteristics. Newer racing craft are lighter, faster and may be more prone to catastrophic failure as a result.

 

The boat buying public should not have to accept a greater risk of catastrophic failure just because a boat is newer, lighter, and faster. The buyer should not have to be responsible to take a guess as to the operating limits of the boat based on the unknown intent of the designer. Designer's have a responsibility to meet at least a minimum standard of safety such as ABS or ISO guidelines. We are finding out catastrophic failures have occured on boats that do not meet those minimum standards, even though the designer or builder has claimed they did. The truth is some modern designers don't have the engineering chops to do the keel attachment analysis in the first place. They get a pass because sailboat designers have been given an idolized status somewhere between surfboard shapers and professional golfers. We would never accept gross incompetence from other professions like dentistry or accounting. But if a keel falls off a sport boat, well that's just racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks! Read to the end of the thread before replying! Sheesh. You're replying to posts made a year and a half ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Folks! Read to the end of the thread before replying! Sheesh. You're replying to posts made a year and a half ago.

 

I replied to a post made today. Just like you. Sheesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

"In what may be the automotive industry’s greatest irony, NHTSA, the federal agency created from Nader’s consumer advocacy, investigated the Corvair and issued a report in 1971 clearing the car’s design, two years after the car went out of production.

 

Part of Nader’s evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it spin around. Such films were not uncommon. GM also had films showing Ford Econoline pickups standing on their noses under heavy braking."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair

 

 

Yeah, folks that rag on the Corvair usually know nothing about them. The second gen (65-69) handled like a wet dream for it's time. There are some dudes still vintage racing the early ones too. I do find that a little odd when there's so many cheap MG's out there to race that would prob be more fun......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

"In what may be the automotive industry’s greatest irony, NHTSA, the federal agency created from Nader’s consumer advocacy, investigated the Corvair and issued a report in 1971 clearing the car’s design, two years after the car went out of production.

 

Part of Nader’s evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it spin around. Such films were not uncommon. GM also had films showing Ford Econoline pickups standing on their noses under heavy braking."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair

 

 

Yeah, folks that rag on the Corvair usually know nothing about them. The second gen (65-69) handled like a wet dream for it's time.

....which is why I said "early 60's". My Dad had a '61 which he has told me was "interesting" to drive on the local mountain roads as the outside rear wheel would "dig in" on tight corners. If there wasn't an issue with the swing arm rear suspension, then why would Chevy completely re-engineer it for the '64 model year? Especially when the rest of the '64 model was mostly the same as the '60-'63.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Corvair was no different than a swing axle Porsche, VW or Mercedes from back in the day.

The only diff was drivers of the German cars were assumed to be able to adapt to the car, while drivers of a Corvair were apparently thinking a rear engined turbocharged car would drive EXACTLY like a 1960 Chevy station wagon.

I was loaning my mid-engined car to my mother once and was in the middle of warning her about what would happen if you lift in the middle of a corner when she asked me if I remembered what kind of car she had when she was 16.

"A turbo Corvair"???

OK - skip the lift-throttle oversteer lecture :lol:

 

Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

"In what may be the automotive industry’s greatest irony, NHTSA, the federal agency created from Nader’s consumer advocacy, investigated the Corvair and issued a report in 1971 clearing the car’s design, two years after the car went out of production.

 

Part of Nader’s evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it spin around. Such films were not uncommon. GM also had films showing Ford Econoline pickups standing on their noses under heavy braking."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair

 

 

Yeah, folks that rag on the Corvair usually know nothing about them. The second gen (65-69) handled like a wet dream for it's time. There are some dudes still vintage racing the early ones too. I do find that a little odd when there's so many cheap MG's out there to race that would prob be more fun......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

"In what may be the automotive industry’s greatest irony, NHTSA, the federal agency created from Nader’s consumer advocacy, investigated the Corvair and issued a report in 1971 clearing the car’s design, two years after the car went out of production.

 

Part of Nader’s evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it spin around. Such films were not uncommon. GM also had films showing Ford Econoline pickups standing on their noses under heavy braking."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair

 

 

Yeah, folks that rag on the Corvair usually know nothing about them. The second gen (65-69) handled like a wet dream for it's time.

....which is why I said "early 60's". My Dad had a '61 which he has told me was "interesting" to drive on the local mountain roads as the outside rear wheel would "dig in" on tight corners. If there wasn't an issue with the swing arm rear suspension, then why would Chevy completely re-engineer it for the '64 model year? Especially when the rest of the '64 model was mostly the same as the '60-'63.

For the 1964 model, they added an additional transverse leaf spring in the rear, and a larger anti roll bar to the front. For the 1965 and later models, they completely redid the suspension and went to a four wheel independent suspension. Note that Nader's book came out in 1965, and would not have had anything to do with the above changes.

 

Interestingly, GM had planned to drop the Corvair after the 1966 model because of the new Camaro, but kept making it for 3 more years because they didn't want to appear pressured by Nader's book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Corvair was no different than a swing axle Porsche, VW or Mercedes from back in the day.

The only diff was drivers of the German cars were assumed to be able to adapt to the car, while drivers of a Corvair were apparently thinking a rear engined turbocharged car would drive EXACTLY like a 1960 Chevy station wagon.

I was loaning my mid-engined car to my mother once and was in the middle of warning her about what would happen if you lift in the middle of a corner when she asked me if I remembered what kind of car she had when she was 16.

"A turbo Corvair"???

OK - skip the lift-throttle oversteer lecture :lol:

 

Of course in the early '60's Chevy probably told it's customers the Corvair was a great car for a twisty mountain road.

 

"In what may be the automotive industry’s greatest irony, NHTSA, the federal agency created from Nader’s consumer advocacy, investigated the Corvair and issued a report in 1971 clearing the car’s design, two years after the car went out of production.

 

Part of Nader’s evidence against the Corvair was a promotional film created by Ford Motor Company, in which a Ford test driver purposely turned the Corvair in a way to make it spin around. Such films were not uncommon. GM also had films showing Ford Econoline pickups standing on their noses under heavy braking."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair

 

 

Yeah, folks that rag on the Corvair usually know nothing about them. The second gen (65-69) handled like a wet dream for it's time. There are some dudes still vintage racing the early ones too. I do find that a little odd when there's so many cheap MG's out there to race that would prob be more fun......

 

Exactly. Early 911's were notoriously bad behaved. Modern ones have tamed the beast, but they are still not as well balanced as a midengined Cayman. (where the engine should have been in a 911 all along)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The truth is some modern designers don't have the engineering chops to do the keel attachment analysis in the first place. They get a pass because sailboat designers have been given an idolized status somewhere between surfboard shapers and professional golfers.

I agree 100%. And some very big names among them, too.

 

There is no reason for a keel to fall off a boat. The attachments required are not heavy, and after all, they are generally made of lead anyway. Design incompetence, or builder incompetence are the primary causes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Major thread creep warning :o

THIS is why I hate the "too windy to race" crap, at least as applied to adults in keelboats. Light air racing breeds light air optimized boats (as in light boats) that beat their heavy built competition. When it finally gets heavy, they call the race - thus locking in the market for light boats - rinse - repeat --

 

The truth is some modern designers don't have the engineering chops to do the keel attachment analysis in the first place. They get a pass because sailboat designers have been given an idolized status somewhere between surfboard shapers and professional golfers.

I agree 100%. And some very big names among them, too.

 

There is no reason for a keel to fall off a boat. The attachments required are not heavy, and after all, they are generally made of lead anyway. Design incompetence, or builder incompetence are the primary causes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or 914, 914-6, 916GT, 917, Boxster, or any number of mid engined cars they made or make.

They had a marketing issue with putting the best engines in the 914, because then the "lower" model would kick the 911's ass. I raced against a 914 that had a hot 3 liter 6 transplanted into it and NOTHING could keep up with him. My paltry 2.1 liters wasn't even close.

 

Exactly. Early 911's were notoriously bad behaved. Modern ones have tamed the beast, but they are still not as well balanced as a midengined Cayman. (where the engine should have been in a 911 all along)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're looking at a wide range of J boats having keel problems. 109's and 124's having some problems has absolutely nothing to do with a pre scrimp 80 having a problem. Also, as I've pointed out before..........more than 1000 J80s out there sailing around and only one has had a keel issue. I think it's that particular 80. Not all 80s.

Yea, I agree. I'm not suggesting a problem with all 80s. But I am saying that too many J-boats pre and post scrimp that have come out of TPI have had keel problems for all of them to be grounding or poor care problems.

 

Car manufacturers have some of the tightest quality control systems in the world. Yet they still measure thousands upon thousands of things gone wrong on their vehicles every year. That includes engines dieing, fires starting, floor mats causing sudden acceleration - safety issues galore.

 

Yet you're surprised that a non-automated industry like hull layup might actually have some defects?

 

I'd wager you do not have a strong grounding in statistical analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it fell off

 

thats not normal is it?

 

no and id like to say this isnt common as there are a lot of Jboats siling world wide that are safe

 

what about this one?

 

I was refferring to the ones that are safe

 

so you're saying this J80 wasnt safe?

 

not at all, it just wasnt as safe as the others

 

why?

 

well some of the other ones are built so the keel doesnt fall off

 

wasnt this built so the keel wouldnt fall off?

 

well obviously not

 

how do you know?

 

well because the keel fell off and hundreds of lbs of lead sank to the bottom, it's a bit of a giveaway.... i'd just like to say that this is NOT normal

 

well what sort of standards are these boats built too?

 

oh very rigorous maritime engineering standards....

 

really, what sort of things?

 

Well, the keels arent supposed to fall off for a start

 

what other things?

 

regulations on what materials can be used...

 

such as?

 

well cardboard is out

 

and?

 

no cardboard derivitives, like paper, paper's out, no string, no celo tape

 

rubber?

 

no rubber's out

 

they've got to have steering, and a min. crew requirement

 

what's the min crew?

 

one i'd imagine.....

 

so the allegation that these boats are built simply to go as fast as possible despite the consuquensesis untrue

 

absolutely ludicris these boats are very very strong boats ...

 

well, what happened in THIS case

 

well the keel fell off of this boat but i stress this is very unusual

 

why do you think the keel fell off?

 

well a wave hit it

 

a wave?

 

yes a wave hit the boat

 

is this unusual?

 

oh yes, a wave? at sea? hardly ever hear of such a thing...

 

so how will the lead in the sunken keel effect the environment?

 

oh, the keel fell of well outside the environment

 

surely you mean it fell off in another environment

 

no, it fell off outside the environment... no environment, all there is is sea, birds, fish and 900lbs of lead, the environment is completely safe...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or 914, 914-6, 916GT, 917, Boxster, or any number of mid engined cars they made or make.

They had a marketing issue with putting the best engines in the 914, because then the "lower" model would kick the 911's ass. I raced against a 914 that had a hot 3 liter 6 transplanted into it and NOTHING could keep up with him. My paltry 2.1 liters wasn't even close.

 

Exactly. Early 911's were notoriously bad behaved. Modern ones have tamed the beast, but they are still not as well balanced as a midengined Cayman. (where the engine should have been in a 911 all along)

 

A 914 is a phenominal car handling wise. Always lacked power.

 

I'm sure a 3 liter 6 in a 914 would be a killer combo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or 914, 914-6, 916GT, 917, Boxster, or any number of mid engined cars they made or make.

They had a marketing issue with putting the best engines in the 914, because then the "lower" model would kick the 911's ass. I raced against a 914 that had a hot 3 liter 6 transplanted into it and NOTHING could keep up with him. My paltry 2.1 liters wasn't even close.

 

Exactly. Early 911's were notoriously bad behaved. Modern ones have tamed the beast, but they are still not as well balanced as a midengined Cayman. (where the engine should have been in a 911 all along)

 

A 914 is a phenominal car handling wise. Always lacked power.

 

I'm sure a 3 liter 6 in a 914 would be a killer combo.

Does it have a Hemi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, actually.

IIRC, the 3.0 liter 911 DOES have a hemispherical combustion chamber.

The lower power 2.0 liter 4s and 6s they with stock - maybe not.

 

Or 914, 914-6, 916GT, 917, Boxster, or any number of mid engined cars they made or make.

They had a marketing issue with putting the best engines in the 914, because then the "lower" model would kick the 911's ass. I raced against a 914 that had a hot 3 liter 6 transplanted into it and NOTHING could keep up with him. My paltry 2.1 liters wasn't even close.

 

Exactly. Early 911's were notoriously bad behaved. Modern ones have tamed the beast, but they are still not as well balanced as a midengined Cayman. (where the engine should have been in a 911 all along)

 

A 914 is a phenominal car handling wise. Always lacked power.

 

I'm sure a 3 liter 6 in a 914 would be a killer combo.

Does it have a Hemi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites