Moisture readings on 1982 34 ft Californian LRC

I am looking at purchasing a 34 ft Californian LRC. Located on the Mississippi River. I hired a boat surveyor to inspect the vessel. His hull moisture readings look good. However as he inspected the deck and stringers on the engine compartment etc, he was getting readings of 30%. At that point he stopped and conferred with me on how I wanted to proceed. He mentioned boring small inspection holes to confirm if the wood is rotten at all.
Anyone have experience on how the ascertain the condition of the stringers etc? Any advice/experience is welcome. This is my first trawler purchase and I’m new on here, so thank you in advance!

Seriously doubt any owner is going to allow you to turn their stringers into swiss cheese.
Tapping with a small hammer is an alternative method for checking condition. The dull thud of tap on a wet stringer is very apparent. The surveyor issues a report with his best estimates regarding condition. You adjust your offer price accordingly. There are no guarantees. Welcome to TF.

Welcome aboard. Agree, they won’t let you drill holes. And I wouldn’t expect them to either. If you really want the boat, adjust the price down accordingly and learn how to use epoxy and fiberglass. It isn’t rocket science but can be hard physical work. Good luck.

Thanks for the feedback. Appreciate it. It looks s s pretty solid boat overall and a fair price. I’ll get aboard again and tap some areas and explore a little deeper

I use a phenolic hammer. It is small and doesn’t hurt the finish. Also it fits in a pocket. I always take it when we look at a boat. A little practice with the hammer and you will be able to tell if the core is good or not. Maybe not as accurate as a moisture meter but it is very quick and easy to use. A sharp tone is good and a dull thud is generally bad.

Thank you for that. I’ll get one of those hammers and give that a go. Are they pretty easy to find in a store?…or more likely order online?

I have had mine for probably 40 years. Amazon has some similar to it.

How do you want to proceed? Your surveyor and his moisture meter has already told you that the stringers are wet. I'm not sure what is to be gained by tapping them with a hammer. I've helped a friend replace the stringers in 2 TTs and it's a ton of unpleasant work and the excavation will likely reveal more problems. On both boats that I helped with we found that the bulkheads at the front and back of the engine space were also wet. Water just ran along the inside of the stringers and got sucked by the bottom of the bulkheads. So both boats got big pieces of the bulkheads replaced. It's really a lot of work and too expensive to be practical, the boats are just not that valuable.
IMO, you either decide that you can live with it or find another boat. But if it's another TT you're likely to find the same problem or something else that's too big to fix.

I'm generally with sean9c.

Wasn't the Californian built in the US? It's probably not as much of a horror story as the TTs to remediate, but still a lot of work.

Yes, the Californians were built in the US. The reason to use a hammer again is to go back when he has a bit more time and check out all of the questionable areas and get a good feel as to how big the scope of work there is. The surveyor is usually in a hurry. He doesn’t have to be. He can look at areas that tap bad and visualize how he may be able or not able to do the repair work. And then make a decision as to proceed or not. I usually spend a day by myself alone on a prospective boat and just peek around. When I do that before the survey the surveyor is surprised how much I know about the boat. I always find things the surveyor misses because I spend the time to look closely. Anyway, good luck and I hope it works out for you whichever way you proceed.

Thank you for not only the gracious replies, but great info! It helps me a lot to know what to look for, what can I learn, how can I mitigate the risk…..so thank you all for your input. I really appreciate it.

Do you know whether you are looking at hollow fibreglass stringers, on a plywood form, or solid, wooden stringers, hidden by fibreglass?

koliver said:

Do you know whether you are looking at hollow fibreglass stringers, on a plywood form, or solid, wooden stringers, hidden by fibreglass?

Click to expand...

On a Californian of that vintage they will be solid wood. Painted. No fiberglass.

Thank you for that sir!

Curious.
You say painted no fiberglass…
What can I expect as to moisture?
I see this boat as a fiberglass hull.

Wen your surveyor "stopped and conferred with me on how I wanted to proceed" he may have been asking if you wanted to proceed further with the survey and the purchase. It`s that serious, as others have opined above.

IMHO if the boat is rare or highly desirable (eg; The only one made OR Hull number 1 of a really good model) then buy it, and be prepared to fix it up because you really wanted that boat, otherwise walk away.
1. The problems will be much greater than you think they are.
2. There is always another one to look at.
3. Do you want to use a boat or fix one up??
4. In my experience moisture meters are very very unreliable. Tapping may be OK IF the original layup was done well ie; no spaces between the timber framework and the original layup.
I bought my boat knowing there were some problematic areas to look at, many months and $ later all fixed. "Talking around the traps", everyone knows that the problem is always bigger than originally thought and will cost will more than estimated!!
Don't say you weren't warned.
That said, what do you want to do with your time, working on your boat is therapeutic, and the reward is creating something that you like and want to use also knowing it has been properly fixed up just saying.....

Comodave said:

I have had mine for probably 40 years. Amazon has some similar to it.

Click to expand...

I use a golf ball glued on the end of a dowel. Gives that perfect sharp tone you’re looking for and won’t mar the finish.

I’m meeting the surveyor today to go through it again. I will also be spending the bulk of the day further tapping and exploring the boat on my own. I guess I’ll see how it goes and make a decision from there. If it looks like scary amounts of work, I’m gonna walk away. Will be disappointing as you don’t see many trawlers in our Midwest Mississippi River area…pretty rare.

Portage_Bay said:

On a Californian of that vintage they will be solid wood. Painted. No fiberglass.

Click to expand...

Painted, no glass. Really? How are they fastened?
I use moisture meters all the time in my work. 30% is fairly high, but not a death sentence. That number can change according to the setting used on the meter and the species of wood being measured. Meter usage can be such a variable thing, and I think it should be used along with soundings to determine the condition of the wood.

As noted below in this thread moisture meters are not the most accurate. Read this Moisture Meter Mythology and it's a good idea to poke around his entire web site. A wealth of information.

The Californians of that vintage, I have an '83 42 LRC, have solid hand laid hulls. When I had a new through hull installed the plug cut out of the bottom was about 1 1/4" thick. And when a new hydronic furnace exhaust port was cut in the side that was over 3/4" thick.

The decks, cabin sides and cabin tops are glass over ply. Typical of boats of that era.

Regarding what your surveyor calls the deck stringers it is important to know which stringers he's talking about, where they are. That will determine the difficulty in repair / replacement. If in a difficult to access area or where a lot of wiring etc has to be moved it will be expensive. But technically I don't think replacing stringers in an older Californian is challenging. If only the stringers are compromised. The construction is simple and straight forward.

Regarding 30% moisture content. Yes, that's a lot. Very wet wood. That does not mean the wood has rotted yet. Yet. It will if not dried out. Go back to the boat with your hammer and tap, tap, tap. You won't gain the expertise to really evaluate in a few hours. But you will be able to find serious rot. Start in areas you know are good then move to the area in question and note the difference. Maybe start in the middle of the engine room an area almost certainly to be dry and sound. Though your OP says

stringers on the engine compartment etc

Click to expand...

If the stringers are soft then question the plywood above. Regarding the surveyor's suggestion to bore holes, as has been said that isn't going to happen until you own the boat. Take a sharp pocket knife with you. If / when you find a soft spot with the hammer try poking it with the knife. If the knife penetrates the wood it's rotten, very rotten.

To give you a sense of how extensive it can be. A buddy with a similar vintage CHB found soft stingers under the cockpit. Before he was done the entire cockpit was torn out. I had a "little" wet spot under the port forward port light. That little spot got quite big when all the rot was removed.

I'm no surveyor, I do in the dim dark past have some boat building experience. So take this next with a grain of salt, heck an entire salt shaker....

I'm very curious about wet stringers in the engine room. The water got in there somehow. The cabin covers the engine room. I'd want to spend the necessary time trying to figure that out, find out what else is wet, what else might be rotten. If the 34 is built like the 42 then the hull sides are solid to the cap rail. Under cap rail it is glassed heavily. The structure from the cap rail down to the deck is heavy glass. None of that provides an easy path for water to enter. The deck and house as I said above are glass over ply unless you find cracks or failures there then also an unlikely place for water to enter. That leads me to guess the water came from the cabin sides, probably the windows. Boat windows of that era are notoriously leaky. And again, if the 34 was built like the 42 it will be hard to find. I learned when installing a new refer that as stated above the cabin sides are glass over ply. Then inside that, the back of the cabinets etc is another sheet of 1/2" ply which is the back of the cabinets held off the cabin side structure by blocks or shims or something. So you can't see, tap and check for moisture the ply of the cabin sides. I'd start with tapping and moisture meter around the windows.


In closing if you are interested in a 40 yr old boat because it's cheaper than newer. Very likely it won't be by the time you're done. Anything built in 82 is likely to have problems. Do your best to find them and make a careful decision. There will always be problems you or the surveyor didn't find.

Cruiser64 said:

I am looking at purchasing a 34 ft Californian LRC. Located on the Mississippi River. I hired a boat surveyor to inspect the vessel. His hull moisture readings look good. However as he inspected the deck and stringers on the engine compartment etc, he was getting readings of 30%. At that point he stopped and conferred with me on how I wanted to proceed. He mentioned boring small inspection holes to confirm if the wood is rotten at all.

Anyone have experience on how the ascertain the condition of the stringers etc? Any advice/experience is welcome. This is my first trawler purchase and I’m new on here, so thank you in advance!

Click to expand...

Cruiser64 said:

Curious.
You say painted no fiberglass…
What can I expect as to moisture?
I see this boat as a fiberglass hull.

Click to expand...

Thank you for that.

Well, I met with the surveyor and the owner gave permission to drill a couple 1inch inspection holes. The stringers we inspected are where the engine bolts to the lower deck down in the bottom of engine compartment. The wood was gone..rotted black. We could ascertain from there that it extended down and forward and back of these inspection points. It was not good. Literally just the fiberglass holding some of that engine weight. I would be very concerned if the boat ever got into heavy weather what would happen. In addition we pegged the moisture meter(35%) at locations around much of the upper deck areas. To walk on any decking there was no “give” or sponginess, but high readings nonetheless. Along with all the updating, sanding, stripping and restoration I was planning to do, this additional reveal of rotten stringers for me is a walk away. I was disappointed obviously, but damn glad I had a good honest surveyor and I found out in advance what I would have gotten into. Thanks everyone for all your advice and comments. The boat search continues.

I previously gave a long winded reply that missed a major point. In your OP you said

deck and stringers on the engine compartment etc

Click to expand...

and I took that to mean the structure that supports the deck above the engine room. Your findings that the engine stringers are rotten is of much more serious concern. Your decision to walk is a good one.

Cruiser64 said:

Well, I met with the surveyor and the owner gave permission to drill a couple 1inch inspection holes. The stringers we inspected are where the engine bolts to the lower deck down in the bottom of engine compartment. The wood was gone..rotted black. We could ascertain from there that it extended down and forward and back of these inspection points. It was not good. Literally just the fiberglass holding some of that engine weight. I would be very concerned if the boat ever got into heavy weather what would happen. In addition we pegged the moisture meter(35%) at locations around much of the upper deck areas. To walk on any decking there was no “give” or sponginess, but high readings nonetheless. Along with all the updating, sanding, stripping and restoration I was planning to do, this additional reveal of rotten stringers for me is a walk away. I was disappointed obviously, but damn glad I had a good honest surveyor and I found out in advance what I would have gotten into. Thanks everyone for all your advice and comments. The boat search continues.

Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry for the confusion. Thank you. There will be other boats. This one I fear could be best served salvaged. There are two low hour Perkins diesels and a good diesel generator.

If the stringers are bad I would walk too. Maybe 15 years ago I would have taken on a project like that but not anymore.

Let me add a few points to this thread based on experience which equates to thirty-four years full time surveying with a Lloyds and Bureau Norske appointments and history on all three U.S. coasts. I’m not a Wikipedia expert or somebody posing at his marina. I’ve paid my dues in a profession that has more rotten fruit on its branches than almost any of the marine trades and yes Marine Surveyors sadly deserve most of the disparaging remarks. Had to get it off my chest

Your post is somewhat confusing so I’m going to conclude since you mention stringers and engine room you’re referring to major longitudinal hull stringers since other than very few GRP builders utilize deck stringer except Halmatic, early Nautor and other very high end builders. Deck stringers are uncommon. Anyway hammer testing legitimate stringers is essentially a waste of time. Most stringers are a ‘hat section’ design using heavy roving fabric with wide tabbing attachment to the hull skin. A phenolic hammer will not provide the acoustic rebound information on such a heavy laminate. The stringer core is frequently multiple layers of wood, on edge, and sometimes foam. This wood or foam core is essentially a mold in which the roving is laid up over. The heavy roving layup in a ‘ hat section ‘ profile is much like a I-beam and is quite rigid when built correctly. True stringer failure usually is identified by delaminated tabbing and worst case with fractures. Water engress is not a sufficient problem to condemn a stringer. Those areas where core failure becomes an issue is where engine and equipment mounts must rely on the core to hold things together. Of course the better system other than lags vertically into the stringer is a saddle type mount where bolting is transverse.

Moisture meters are unfortunately an instrument too easily considered the final answer and so common that untrained users are way too quick to proclaim a problem. Like ultrasonic thickness meters and infrared scanners the users often don’t have sufficient training or experience to make close calls. Most of these meters are capacitance types that near metallic fasteners etc. will read inaccurately high, a factor many users should know but unfortunately don’t consider or understand. Bottom line is always take scanning type moisture meter readings skeptically. They are only one tool in the bag and almost never the final answer so a good surveyor must look for other indications of a problem. Most don’t.

Water intrusion into a stringer is very very common and frequently can be attributed to limber holes. Few builders spend the time or money to either seal with epoxy or line these drainage holes. Other obvious penetrations include engine mounts and installation beds, etc.. If possible, and I say this cause limber holes are very difficult to physically access, probe the stringer walls and try to determine thickness and integrity. A .250” to .312” wall thickness offers a lot of longitudinal stiffness if properly built and tabbed on most cruising boats with a proper multi-stringer design. One last thing and though somewhat rare it’s been found with a number of lesser quality builders. It’s a situation where a builder using one mold offers several different lengths. Look closing to see if in fact those stringers in the lazarette are continuous, i.e.not just short phony sections tabbed in at the aft bullhead.

Rick

So is there no edit option on my post above. It’s a mess with a bunch or repeat lines buried in the text. Anyway it’s embarrassing I’d I like to lean it up.

Any ideas

garbler said:

So is there no edit option on my post above. It’s a mess with a bunch or repeat lines buried in the text. Anyway it’s embarrassing I’d I like to lean it up.

Any ideas

Click to expand...

I cleaned it up, how does that look now. Hopefully I didn’t delete too much.

Comodave said:

I cleaned it up, how does that look now. Hopefully I didn’t delete too much.

Click to expand...

Really appreciate the effort and thanks.

Rick