Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

[melbourne]

Hi Everyone.

I live on the east coast of Florida on the Indian River and I am shopping for a newer boat.

Can anyone provide me some guidance that would help me decide if there are any structural factors that would make an all fiberglass boat more superior or inferior to a boat that has wooden stringers and wooden decks??

An Angler boat would be one example of a "wood less" boat.


Thanks.

 

[2Smokinya]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

I like fiberglass because of less maintenance and over time, a wood boat will absorb some water and gain some weight.

 

[tashasdaddy]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

if i ever buy another new one, it will be an all glass boat.

 

[ziggy]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

if there are any structural factors that would make an all fiberglass boat more superior or inferior to a boat that has wooden stringers and wooden decks??

well, at the very least, the fiberglass won't rot.......less rot in an older boat generally means a more structuraly sound boat.... on the other hand. ya know, it's always the other hand that gets ya in trouble. anyways. my 75 speedboat is all fiberglass. inner and outer hull. no stringers, only foam inbetween. i'd bet that if i ever get water into the area between the inner and outer hull. it'd be a deal breaker, boat killler for me.......so far i ain't had that issue. so i think all fiberglass is a good idea. but i still reserve judgement...an original non restored 75, used 3 times weekly this summer seems like a good testiment to this idea.........

 

[melbourne]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

Thanks Ziggy, great "other hand" advice.

 

[melbourne]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

OK so it sounds like fiberglass is the way to go. I would like to know what the trade off is....i typically feel there is some type of trade off between one technology and another....so what's the downside of an all glass boat?

 

[melbourne]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

Thanks 2Smokinya and Tashasdaddy.

 

[ziggy]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

I would like to know what the trade off is

a pretty light boat

http://www.iboats.com/Aristo_Craft__19_HT__1975/bp/64b4356r2

that does 43 mph with a 75 technology hull...... which i don't think is up to 07 technology by anymeans.....hull design has advanced.........

 

[tashasdaddy]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

the trade off is usually in the price, all glass boats are more expensive for their class boat.

 

[Texasmark]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

Wood absorbs energy much better than composites/metals and similar materials which deflect the energy to somewhere else. One of the reasons boat builders used wood in stringers was for that reason (they said so and I agree).

Course to glass in a wooden 2x6 into the hull of a boat was probably easier and cheaper than building up a composite structure as mentioned.

Also, it's hard to realize your stringer absorbing the impact of smashing through waves with your hull intact and not bending under the stress. One would think that if the hull did that, it wouldn't be long before the glass would fracture and fail.

Actually I was looking at a MFG boat once with a fat 75 OMC and as I was test driving it, there was a crack along the deck hull interface that flexed as I hit the waves. Obviously it was a no sale.

I totally agree with composites as in selecting an older boat my first concern is just that; how much damage has water done to the wood......one reason I bought alum boats if buying a used boat. Now you don't have to.

My 2c,

Mark

 

[Texasmark]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

Wood absorbs energy much better than composites/metals and similar materials which deflect the energy to somewhere else. One of the reasons boat builders used wood in stringers was for that reason (they said so and I agree).

Course to glass in a wooden 2x6 into the hull of a boat was probably easier and cheaper than building up a composite structure as mentioned.

Also, it's hard to realize your stringer absorbing the impact of smashing through waves with your hull intact and not bending under the stress. One would think that if the hull did that, it wouldn't be long before the glass would fracture and fail.

Actually I was looking at a MFG boat once with a fat 75 OMC and as I was test driving it, there was a crack along the deck hull interface that flexed as I hit the waves. Obviously it was a no sale.

I totally agree with composites as in selecting an older boat my first concern is just that; how much damage has water done to the wood......one reason I bought alum boats if buying a used boat. Now you don't have to.

My 2c,

Mark

 

[KCook]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

In a newer boat I would not expect structural problems, unless that particular boat just happened to be a lemon. So my concern would be the care and workmanship in the construction, more than the materials. All of my boats had wood, which was not a problem on any of them. But they were not real old boats either. Nor did I have plans to keep any of them for many years.

Kelly Cook

 

[jspringator]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

What are some used boat brands/models with a no wood design?

 

[KCook]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

For I/O pleasure boats Bryant was the pioneer in this. Otherwise fishing boats adopted the "wood free" theme faster than the bowrider sector did. There is also a distinction between designs that are completely wood free, and those that simply eliminated the wood from the stringers and transom (structurally wood free). It's very tough to map out the dates all the different brands made these transitions. And to what degree they have done that.

Kelly

 

[Ezrider_92356]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

i am about to under go a complete floor stringer and transom replacement on an old boat i dont have an option till after i complete this project although in doing this project i plan on keeping the boat for a very long time if the boat has lasted sense 1958 with wood and last used 2 years ago dosent seem structurally unsound wood cant be that bad, basicly if the interior dident need to be redone i would probably hold off a year on redoing everything but i dont want to redo the interior only to have to take it back apart next year to replace all the wood that i just dont realy trust being that old. i would use all wood to replace everything again but the verdic is still out till i educate myself more.

 

[Texasmark]

Re: Compare All Fiberglass "No Wood" Boats

The problem with rotten wood, other than water absorption and added weight, is that it has lost it's structural integrity and can/will fail under stress.......stress when you need it most: Trying to get home in a storm; or in the case of a transom, supporting the stress of a firewalled engine.

Additionally, if open cell (sprayed in) foam was used as buoyancy, as it was for years, it too is probably full of water (the water that rotted your stringers, transom, or deck) and you have more weight and less buoyancy to contend with.

My 2c and I have lived with several "soggy" boats. That's how I learned to avoid them.

On which boat is all composite, a lot currently are. If you find an older boat that you are considering purchasing, call them and ask about their current wood content and when did they remove the wood, which wood, all of it, stringers, transom, and deck underlayment.

I had an '89 Ranger that had an all composite transom. I think the deck and stringers were still wood. I know the hatch covers were plywood cored, sandwiched between two plastic (gell coated fg) outer layers. But I will say that they went to great pains to keep the water from the wood, course Ranger is one of your better boats. Try one and you'll know for yourself.

Mark