Hey all,
Well I went to check out the trailer for the ensign hull I mentioned in a previous post. It wasn't exactly what I'd hoped but it was a tandem, all galvanized and built only 3 years ago. I paid the $1500 and got over it.
Now, the hull I selected of the three available had already been stripped down and ready for restoration. No bulkheads, benchs, floors etc... I consider this a very good thing as I see the work Tim went through to remove the interior of #100. The other two definitley need the same treatment. Another thing I like, the deck has even been seperated from the hull. However, it is missing a 1ft chunk out of the port bow. (Shark attack???) I'm figuring on a complete recore of the deck from the intial survey of it. Or I could get a brand new shiny one from Ensign Spars for $4200+ shipping. But where's the fun in that.
I hoping for some opinions here as this'll be my first project such as this. I did do a transom on a ski boat however.
I was thinking I could remove the deck, roll it over and do the recore from the inside. Possibly even relaminating the bottom side completely. What would I use for core material?? I've heard of Divinicell (foam) but can't find information on it. Anybody?? It seems like ply would be difficult to work with considering the camber/curve of the deck but maybe I'm wrong. What ever I use corewise I'm going to be using alot of glass to relaminate even if the decks are minimal on the Ensign. Would polyester be a viable alternative to epoxy to save some money in this application??
What about the shark bite? Is there a way to make a mold from one of the other hulls and reglass that in?? I have a some pics but don't know the posting procedure yet.
Thanks, SteveO
Re-coring decks
-
Dave, 397
The deck has a significant impact on hull shape and form...if it were I, I'd block the boat as evenly as I could, as level as I could, and re-attach the deck to the hull securely and permanently BEFORE I did anything else. Then I'd recore from outside.
If the skin and/or core is removed from the deck sandwich, it becomes a very floppy item indeed, and the odds of getting a uniform--or desirable--shape back in it are pretty low if it was done of the boat. It's entirely possible that the deck would simply NOT FIT back onto the hull at all after that.
Divinicell is pretty costly stuff, also doesn't like beating sun. The ply used is cut into smallish squares/rectangles in order to make the curves. It's also awfully heavy. Balsa is fairly inexpensive and definitely lightweight, and still a good choice for a boat like yours. If you plan on racing the boat you'll probably want the lightest weight option, which is balsa stuck in with poly resin.
There are potential problems with that, too. Another option is to use Nida core material, which as a material itself is the least expensive, lighteset and strongest of your choices...but it does use a considerable amount of epoxy resin to do it (my triton used about 14 gallons).
Here's where the weight--and most importantly its' placement--become critical: Take a good look at the elevation above the CG of every pound of weight you might add, then multiply that weight by the distance in feet above the CG. This, roughly, is the amount of effective ballast lost in the process. That's why I comment on the use of plywood or other heavy stuff in the decks.
Just my .02
Dave
If the skin and/or core is removed from the deck sandwich, it becomes a very floppy item indeed, and the odds of getting a uniform--or desirable--shape back in it are pretty low if it was done of the boat. It's entirely possible that the deck would simply NOT FIT back onto the hull at all after that.
Divinicell is pretty costly stuff, also doesn't like beating sun. The ply used is cut into smallish squares/rectangles in order to make the curves. It's also awfully heavy. Balsa is fairly inexpensive and definitely lightweight, and still a good choice for a boat like yours. If you plan on racing the boat you'll probably want the lightest weight option, which is balsa stuck in with poly resin.
There are potential problems with that, too. Another option is to use Nida core material, which as a material itself is the least expensive, lighteset and strongest of your choices...but it does use a considerable amount of epoxy resin to do it (my triton used about 14 gallons).
Here's where the weight--and most importantly its' placement--become critical: Take a good look at the elevation above the CG of every pound of weight you might add, then multiply that weight by the distance in feet above the CG. This, roughly, is the amount of effective ballast lost in the process. That's why I comment on the use of plywood or other heavy stuff in the decks.
Just my .02
Dave