For those of you who ask about flotation foam.....is it worth it???

[jigngrub]

Being as Lake Assault at the time of that article had only been being built for maybe 5 years I would consider it fairly "new",.........

That said, Yous are correct in that some bad decisions lead to the sinking,............

Also,........The original owners of Lakes sold the company to one of the shipyards in Superior,.....Not sure if they are still making them or not,...

I used to see a couple of them around the walleye tournament scene, Haven't seen one in years,................

The article states the boat was an 18' cc which puts it in the under 20' category which are required to have positive floatation... I can't see a 5 yr. old boat in that category sinking "Titanic style" (as stated in the article) unless the floatation was compromised or modified.

 

[benjh1028]

What many people don't realize about "floatation foam" is that in many instances it's also a necessary structural component (is in my 1995 Larson). If you are doing a full restoration job, stand on the deck before you pour any foam, then again after the foam. If you can't feel the difference its likely you are severely malnourished.

 

[kjsAZ]

What many people don't realize about "floatation foam" is that in many instances it's also a necessary structural component (is in my 1995 Larson). If you are doing a full restoration job, stand on the deck before you pour any foam, then again after the foam. If you can't feel the difference its likely you are severely malnourished.

Yes, it basically is the same as "composite construction". A stiff layer on both sides of a rigid foam has tremendous stability. That's why replacing pour-in foam with these pink/blue foam panels may not be the best idea. Not only do they burn like hell compared to the Polyurethane foam and dissolve in fuel, Polyester and many other liquids they also don't form the same type of a rigid structure.

 

[Browndog10]

I am really feeling better about choosing the pour in foam over the boards. I like the idea that the foam will add some reinforcement to the hull when crashing through rough seas. Unless I really screw up my restore I should never have to pull the foam out again, which right now is the biggest downside to it. Also, maybe the mods make this thread a sticky?

 

[kjsAZ]

I am really feeling better about choosing the pour in foam over the boards. I like the idea that the foam will add some reinforcement to the hull when crashing through rough seas. Unless I really screw up my restore I should never have to pull the foam out again, which right now is the biggest downside to it. Also, maybe the mods make this thread a sticky?

The problem with the pour-in foam is what's the best one. The 2lbs naturally gives the most buoyancy but it also is the most prone to fracturing under vibration and shock loads. Boat manufacturers use it because it gives the most flotation in the smallest volume. What happens you can see in all these threads.... The 3lbs is already better and the 4lbs is a lot stronger and more resilient to disintegration. However, it adds weight to the boat and you need more volume (places) for it.
A nice side effect from a pour-in foam application is that it dampens noise a lot.

 

[kjsAZ]

dup

 

[zool]

Ive never understood the reasoning for not replacing factory foam in a full restore, aside from structural benefits, for any away from shore boating, you need either foam flotation, or redundant pumps, a self deploying raft, and self deploying epirb, at a minimum. A valise raft stored in a locker does no little in a capsized boat, foam flotation does little good in a fire, and neither does much good offshore without a good epirb....floating around when no one is looking for you is a slow demise. All of the above is the best choice before any fancy gear.

My big rig didn't come with foam, and I didn't add it (couldn't fit enough to do much good anyway)...so I run 2 double bilge pump setups, self deploying canister raft with ditch bag, and epirb....

And given some of the conditions ive been caught in, frequenting Church might be a good idea too

 

[Mud Puppy]

Yeah foam; so many times I think that people just go on what their mother's brother's uncle's next door neighbor's best friend said he seen once and they really don't have a clue as to what hey are doing and don't even have a clue as to what heir boat and gear weighs so they just go with what feels right and it may not be enough.

We once got a leading edge in on an aircraft and they tell me it was full of Plaster of Paris. I didn't get to see it, it was before my time. Anybody can do just about anything they want, just doesn't make it right.

The CG has a pretty ominous looking calculation, but it really isn't that hard. Plug in a few variables and it will tell you just how many CF of foam you need for positive bouncy for the wight of your rig.

I won't go on just what feels or looks right. I want to know.

 

[tpenfield]

The problem with the pour-in foam is what's the best one. The 2lbs naturally gives the most buoyancy but it also is the most prone to fracturing under vibration and shock loads. Boat manufacturers use it because it gives the most flotation in the smallest volume. What happens you can see in all these threads.... The 3lbs is already better and the 4lbs is a lot stronger and more resilient to disintegration. However, it adds weight to the boat and you need more volume (places) for it. A nice side effect from a pour-in foam application is that it dampens noise a lot.

Weight difference between 2 lb and 4 lb foam is not a big deal in most applications. Manufacturers would tend to use the density that is the most cost effective, which, as you said, is the lower density. I believe the USCG regulations on fuel tank installation states 4 lb or better., but it has been a while since I last reviewed the regulations. In doing the restoration/repair work on my boat, the foam appeared to be at least 4 lb density, may have been a bit more. 2 lb is pretty easy to spot, because the cells in the foam are fairly large.

 

[jigngrub]

Weight difference between 2 lb and 4 lb foam is not a big deal in most applications.

You are correct sir.

The average boat less than 20' in length takes 12-16 cubic feet of foam and the weight difference between 2 and 4 lb. foam for that amount is 24-32 lbs... about the same as 3 bags of ice in a cooler.

 

[tpenfield]

I have not read all of the post on this thread, but I do recall the question being asked about which boats have failed the basic and/or level flotation tests? I found some info on the BoatUS national recall registry. . .

 

[jigngrub]

I have not read all of hand post on this thread, but I do recall the question being asked about which boats have failed the basic and/or level flotation tests? I found some info on the BoatUS national recall registry. . .

You gonna give us a link... or are you gonna make us work for it (google)?

 

[tpenfield]

Actually, I found a better list directly on the USCG web site. . . You can do a search of the recalls by problem or manufacturer, etc. so if you put in "flotation" you can get a condensed list. http://www.uscgboating.org/recalls/recall_database.aspx?problem=Flotation&sort=mic

 

[jigngrub]

Actually, I found a better list directly on the USCG web site. . . You can do a search of the recalls by problem or manufacturer, etc. so if you put in "flotation" you can get a condensed list. http://www.uscgboating.org/recalls/r...ation&sort=mic

Thanks for the link!

I take back half of the bad stuff I ever said about you.

Edit:
That list hasn't been updated recently, the newest boat I could find with a floatation problem is a 2011 Hells Bay... but it's a great list to see if you older or used boat has a problem.

 

[tpenfield]

Looks like Crestliner had a 'bad day' back in 2012 . . . a whole slew of their boats failed.

Nothing for 2014 in terms of flotation.

the BoatUS site does not seem to be as updated as the USCG site, so, probably not worth looking at that, except for historical info.


I would also assume that these are the under 20 foot boats, since the regulation do not apply to over 20 feet.

Perhaps the ABYC has some testing for larger boats, since those 'standards' apply to boats up to 26 feet.

Thanks for the link!

I take back half of the bad stuff I ever said about you.

Thanks . . . I guess