ancora
Guru
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2007
- Messages
- 4,022
Impressive how much remains....if she were fiberglass or aluminum it would just be a puddle on the ground. Looks like this may become a boat again someday.
You might know better than most. But I find it hard to believe the cost of rehabbing it would be cost effective in the long run. I guess it depends on how deep the damage goes.
It does from the outside look like you could at least save the hull. Even if you had to cut away a great deal on the rest. But then there are all the costs of doing that plus the clean up/ gutting process.
It might pay but obviously is only for those with rather deep pockets.
Advertise it as a heat treated steel boat
I've been around a boat that had a minor fire (shore cord burned up some fiberglass around receptacle). It's been two years since the repair and everytime I step on the boat you can smell that burnt electrical odor.
Depending on the clean-up and sandblast cost the hull and perhaps most of the superstructure is still good. Advertise it as a heat treated steel boat
I would think the hull is going to have more value as scrap than as a hull. The problem is getting it in pieces and to the scrap yard.
Building a steel hull is the cheap part of the boat all the mechanical parts is where the cost is. Better to scrap and start fresh even for a fishing boat.
You just don't build on a questionable foundation.
Thread drift......
I don't think that statement makes much sense. The vast majority of people on this forum are going to sea in 40+ year old fiberglass structures built by unknown Asian people with absolutely zero quality control and no testing. People are happy to risk the lives of their families on boats which they have no information as to structural integrity, seaworthiness, or safety. The only fact available is "It hasn't sunk yet."
Yes, I know about pre-purchase surveys, I've read hundreds of them. The structure "appears sound".....this is a joke. Fitness for purpose is avoided completely, due to liability. The only thing stated with conviction is that the boat exists, that they will stand behind.
The other side of that argument is that pleasure boats spend few hours under way, don't go far from shelter, and mostly travel in good weather. So far (and within tight limits) insurance companies judge the risk quite small.
Back on topic....
No one should touch her because the hull is the cheap part? No one should rebuild her because there are thousands of existing, floating, useable boats for sale at bargain prices. But some people have other ideas.......