Bill Shaw Answers The Mail - The Pearson Current - Volume 4, #3

BILL SHAW ANSWERS THE MAIL
The Pearson Current - Volume 4, #3 - 1998

Could you pass this one onto Bill Shaw Re: Athwartship Stringers. I have a 1975 Pearson 10M Hull No. 92 which the previous owner(s) had crashed into something very hard. The athwartship stringer furthest rear in the bilge area had a crack in it . . . looks like someone hit the forward part of the keel forcing the tail into the hull and cracked the stringer. The problem was picked up during the survey but we thought it was not too badly cracked. Before going into the water in the spring it was discovered that a coverup was done by the previous owner or yard at the rear of the keel at the base of the hull. When area was opened up, the crack had gone into the hull but not all the way through. My yard ground up all the damaged area and the wet spots were dried out, filled and properly glassed over. When the boat just came out of the water a few days ago, we discovered the repair at the rear of the keel had cracked while under stress of the keel weight. I am thinking of grinding down the broken area by removing the fiberglass covering down to the bare wood to the break in the stringer and then "sister" up another section of wood to the stringer. This should shore it up. I intend to glass the new stringer to the bilge area and then to the cracked stringer, hoping to give it back the strength it lost in the cracking. My question is, am I headed in the right direction on this repair? And when it goes back in the water after the winter’s nap might it be able to support the weight at that spot and not crack again? Any thoughts and thank Bill Shaw for me if you send it along to him.
- Bob Studen

Dear Bob,
In correcting this problem consider the wood pieces as simply a form over which the fiberglass is layed-up. The glass does the work, not the wood. Foam is sometimes used in place of wood.

I would recommend several layers of 1.5 mat and 18 oz. f lat weave roving-woven. Alternate layers in the narrowest part of the keel pocket. These layers should run up the sides of the hull, then fill the remaining pocket with layers of glass.

I’m a Pearson Current subscriber and I’ve some questions regarding the suitability of my 10M for offshore sailing. I’ve noted Mr. Shaw’s comment (web site) about Pearsons generally not being constructed for offshore work. However, I feel as if my 10M is well designed and constructed and with a couple of improvements, would serve well. Incidentally, I have the original Pearson 10M sales brochure and it implies that the boat would be safe offshore! I’m not looking for advice on getting a generic boat upgraded. (Long list of stuff to be sure: secure stowage, large enough cockpit scuppers, and appropriate sails, sound rig, etc.) But I’d like any comment on any construction details of the 10M that would need beefing up. There is one area about which I already have a concern; the bulkheads in the way of the mast. I wonder if they should be anchored to the deck. They sit in a groove molded into the liner and I can feel movement there when the boat is sailed hard to weather. Would it be a good idea to somehow tab this in to the deck? Perhaps epoxy/ glass to the liner and then mechanically fasten the liner to the deck? Have any other 10M owners done something like this? Should I leave it alone and assume some movement is to be expected? Are there any other areas that I should be concerned about? One other thing: I had previously e-mailed requesting info on the torque spec for keel bolts in this boat. When putting my mast step back in after painting, I went ahead and torqued the nuts down to about 110 foot pounds. But have no idea if this is too little. I assume it’s not too much. In any case, after a full season the keel is still attached to the boat. I guess I could loosen one of the others and note the force needed to do so, but it would be nice to know what the builder felt was appropriate. If anyone has an idea, I’d love to hear it.
- Reed Cournoyer

Dear Reed,
I will leave the offshore discussion to my comments in this issue. On the headliner however, this has no meaningful strength by itself and its purpose was strictly cosmetic. As far as the torque values on the keel bolts the following are the guidelines we used:

Bolt Diameter (inches)	Torque (Ft-lbs.)
3/8	16
1/2	38
5/8	70
3/4	125
1	200
1 1/4	600

Our names are Joel and Kay Benefiel. In June of last year, we purchased a 1977 Pearson 35. We love our boat; she has outperformed all of our expectations and has delighted us greatly. At the present time, we are bringing her up to yacht condition, which is basically cosmetic. The boat was well cared for over the years. We are wondering if there is a place to purchase decals etc. which were originally on the boat, as some are missing. Any help would be appreciated.
— Joel and Kay Benefiel, 941-263-7539

Dear Joel and Kay,
The decals are no longer available but Bill Lawrence has asked a few sources to reproduce them for the NPYOA. Some of the original artwork exists, but can’t be reproduced for each model in exactly the same manner as they were originally placed on the cabin. Bill will inform members through the newsletter as soon as a decision on who will produce them for us is made. If anyone has a suggestion or knows of other sources for this kind of item, please let us know.

I have a Pearson Invicta II, 1968 Hull #113. It is a shoal keel centerboard model. I have never been sure who the designer was, Carl Alberg or Bill Shaw. It’s a great boat and I would appreciate any information on the designer and the boat. Thanks.
— Arvydas Laucius

Dear Arvydas,
The original Invicta was designed by the late Bill Tripp and was the first fiberglass boat to win the Bermuda Race. The Invicta II used the same hull with my new deck configuration and Bill Tripp’s blessing.

I own a 1990 Pearson 36, wing keel, hull #190. I have had corrosion with the stainless steel bolts that attach my keel to the hull. My question is, do you have any idea how the bolts are attached to the keel? I’d appreciate your response as soon as possible. Thanks for your support.
— Dan Buttorff

Dear Dan, a bronze wire brush and coat the threads with waterproof grease.
The keel bolts were cast into the lead keel as "J" bolts. Where is the corrosion? Probably in the threads, stainless will do that. Clean up the corroded areas using

I own a P-28, manufactured in 1978. The boat was trucked from Chicago to Florida last year. It has been out of the water for approximately one year. In a very short period, there has been a severe delamination where the keel joins the bottom of the boat. (The keel is a fin keel.) It looks as if somebody peeled a banana. I don’t have a clue what could have caused this other than there has always been a crack where the keel butts up against the bottom and we have had a tremendous amount of rain that probably has run down the sides of the boat into that crack. (I have faired this crack every spring before the boat was launched, but have never taken up on the keel bolts since the boat has always looked the same since I bought it in 1979 and the dealer told me the crack was normal— only cosmetic.) What am I looking for in terms of repair? I know this sounds like a dumb question, but the yard people where I keep my boat are powerboat guys, not sailboat guys. I am quite confident that they don’t know any more about how to properly repair my boat than I do. For the obvious reason I’d like to make sure it is repaired properly. Help! I would really appreciate any input you could give me. I love this boat and I want it.
— Brooke Bennett

Dear Brooke,
The joint between the top of the keel and the hull frequently opens with time. The bedding compound at this joint can shrink and sometimes the keel bolts do need tightening. Please consult the torque values on page 2, as they apply to the size bolts you have.

My 1973 Pearson 30, hull No. 394 came to me with a hand-wheel screw-type backstay tensioner. How much can the mast be safely bent? Also is the mast intended to be raked and, if so, how much? Lastly, what are satisfactory methods of attaching a boom vang to the mast? Thanks for your help.
— Jim Snyder

Dear Jim,
On the mast rake, start with about 6" aft, then check for balance under sail. My advice is to have a local sail maker on board. Most boom vangs have specific methods of attachment built into them. You need to choose the vang that accommodates your deck layout, dodger, running rigging, etc.

I have a 1982 Flyer. I need to replace the original BMW diesel. I have two options: 1) I came across a used, very clean 18 HP Yanmar 2GM. This engine is three times as powerful as the original BMW engine. Are there any issues I should consider before upgrad ing the engine? Do I need to go up to a 1" shaft? I would like to optimize my speed under power—prop size, pitch, etc. What kind of an organization can help me with this issue? 2) I am also considering a small 4-stroke outboard engine (about 10 HP). I hate the idea of having the weight at the aft and I hate the idea of removing a 10 Hp-stroke at the start of each race. Can an internal "retractable" outboard well be built right where the BMW diesel is installed? I am thinking a similar setup as in Hobbie 33 and/or the new Henderson 30. I will appreciate any comments you might have on this issue.
— Semih Kangal

Dear Semih,
It is best to consult the Yammar people on this question. Any time you change engines, you need to have the manufacturer advise you on prop and shaft size. They often need to see the actual boat to get an idea about other factors, such as the type of sailing you do. If you are strictly racing, that will impact the decision a lot. I can not comment on the construction of the well without actually inspecting your boat. You might check with your yard or other Flyer owners to see if they have ever done such a modification.

The boat is a 1984 Pearson 34 Centerboard. Problem: in heavy seas with the board down, a wave picks the boat up then drops and the centerboard goes "THUMP." If we put the board into the trunk, a wave hits us abeam and the board hits one side of the trunk then the other side and you hear "BANG BANG."

Is the solution: a.) Drive a pin through the trunk to hold the board still and fiberglass bottom or b.) pin through the trunk and board then bolt and glass in a plate of lead the same size as the bottom but 4" thick.

In solution b, I gain 6" of draft because the weight of lead would pull the boat down some. This would also make the boat stiffer so I wouldn’t have to reef so soon. Do you have a different opinion? Do you like A or B? Has anyone out there done either and what are your results? Anyone can call me collect any night after 6 pm at 813-595-0704 or Fax 813- 524-6011.
— Tom Dooley

Dear Tom,
Option "B" would simply not work and should not be considered. If the CB banging is bothering you that much, you can try placing a large washer on either side of the CB pin. This will restrict its movement.

My partner and I own Susanoo, a 1985 P-36, Hull #19. We bought her in 1994 and have done extensive work on all of her systems: electrical, plumbing, sails, etc. We bought a Pearson because of its reputation for being overbuilt, and until recently we thought this was true. We have taken Susanoo almost completely apart and know how well she is built. We previously owned Second Look, a Pearson Ensign.

This spring we installed a Sailtec adjustable backstay for better performance. After two months, and after a ten-day cruise through New England, we noticed what appeared to be a failure of the fastener for the backstay (chainplate?) Upon further investigation by my partner, he found that a modification to the backstay chainplate was made sometime in 1986-87 to other Pearson yachts. My response was one of surprise since Pearson had the reputation of notifying their customers that a possible structural problem existed. There was a notice mailed to all Pearson customers who owned P-36’s that a possible failure of the hatch cover existed. Pearson even mailed, at no charge, to their customers metal strips to reinforce the hatch covers and offered to reimburse those owners who installed them. Pearson made no notice of this defect as far as I know. Our problem could have been disastrous. Several people evaluated our problem and came to the same conclusion: in high winds, we could have lost our rig.

Please alert all P-36 owners that they should inspect their rigging, particularly the backstay chainplate for possible signs of wear. Our rigger should have picked up on our problem but most of it was hard to notice unless a careful inspection was made. All riggers should have been aware of the problem with Pearsons. Thanks for your attention and keep up with the good work.
- Frank Merne

Dear Frank,
If this is an hydraulic adjuster, you need to read the fine print in the warrantee. Having no control over the amount of tension that anyone could put on it, we could not warrant boats with this device.

In general, any time we did have a problem that we felt owners needed to know about, we mailed notices to all owners of record. In most cases, it went to the dealer who was requested to send us the names and addresses of owners. If the boat had a second owner he/she was to notify us of the purchase. We made every attempt to keep up-to-date on Pearson Yacht ownership.

I have a 1969 P-35 with a two-blade prop direct driven from an Atomic 4. To aid getting into and out of my slip, I am considering installation of a three-blade prop.

Can you advise if this is a sound approach and, if so, the procedure and resource determining appropriate size & pitch. Your recommendations will be appreciated.
— Al Lankford

Dear Al,
We get many requests like this and although it would appear to be an easy one for a designer to answer, it is not. So many modifications are made to boats through the years that an evaluation of each boat needs to be made when thinking of changing a prop. This is especially true when an engine replacement is under consideration, which is the reason behind many of the requests we receive. You need to have a qualified mechanic take a look at your boat, the type of sailing you do and any specific issues related to your slip that might be resolved in some other way. The P35 does back down with difficulty because of the specific keel and rudder configuration, but many owners have learned to adjust to this without major expense.

Pearson sold davits specially made for their vessels. They had "female" type fittings which telescoped over "male" type fittings on the stern stanchions. I Am looking for a set (used) and/or name of the manufacturer. I have a P365.
— Bob Siegel <thesiegels@erols.com>

Dear Bob,
Sorry, I do not recall the specific davits we used on your boat. Even if I did, they probably are not being made now. I suggest you consult your favorite boat owners buyer’s guide and see which of the many that are advertised might meet your needs .

It was good of you to respond and I am glad to join the NPYOA. My boat is a Pearson "Electra" hull #239 and was built in 1964. 1) I need to know what the rudder dimensions are and how was it attached to the shaft? 2) Also is the lead keel glassed in or bolted? Thank you again.
— Frank Wagner Guernsey

Dear Frank,
Sorry, I know nothing about the Electra, it was before my time. Possibly another owner/member might be able to help you out.

We purchased P-36 hull #140 new in June 1987. Recently, we had an engine problem and found the shaft to be damaged. It finally dawned on me that I had never put the facts together that the shaft was advertised as being 1-1/4-inch stainless steel and that I knew it to be bronze/brass. Do you know why at least this boat was not outfitted with a stainless steel shaft?
— Alvin Glazier

Dear Alvin,
What kind of damage did you suffer? Sometimes SS shafts were simply not available and we used bronze, never brass. There is nothing wrong with using bronze however.

I have a 1978 323 and need to add extra water reserve. I have the standard 19 gal tanks under each bunk, but that runs out rather quickly. Where else have they put tanks on a 323. In the bow, I have used one side (starboard) for (head) holding tank and connections. I was thinking about a tank over fuel area of maybe forward port side.

Another thing, have you ever heard of central a/c on this model? If so, where do you put the compressor?
— Tarkeel@aol.com

Dear Tarkeel,
I can not answer this without seeing the boat and the modifications that have been made to it. You might bring in someone from your yard and consider using the flexible tanks now on the market. They can be placed in many different spaces due to the material they are made of.

It’s finally time for a new mainsail for CATNIP Pearson 23C hull #39. The original Hood main has lasted surprisingly well. I’ve been talking with Hood, Doyle and some local sailmakers. Since I’ve installed a rigid boom vang to replace the topping lift, it’s possible the roach could be enlarged. I have blueprints of the deckplan and sailplan, and I noticed a change order from the original 230 SF full-batten, larger-roach main to a standard batten 210 SF main. Why the change? Problems with raising and lowering the sail with that dastardly 7/8" sailtrack? Too much weather helm? Interference with the topping lift? Cost cutting (one would need lazyjacks as well)? I’m very close to ordering a sail, and I feel I need to know if there are any perilous constraints that would preclude a larger roach/ larger sail. Thanks for any advice you can give.
— Tom Curley
<curley@silverlink.net>

Dear Tom,
I am sorry but I do not recall why we made the change. You can, however, trust the judgment of your sail maker as to how the boat will react to the increased roach. Just be sure he/she goes sailing with you on the boat both before and after the sail is made.