|
Post by On y va on Mar 23, 2016 8:14:38 GMT
Reading this......is exactly what I have seen happening over the last 10 years or so.....
|
|
|
Post by Kashmir on Mar 23, 2016 15:25:34 GMT
Unfortunately this is how we feel about our boat which is nearly 12 months old now. I appreciate that the conditions the boat mentioned on FB was sailing in were extreme but the boats are marketed and sold as oceangoing yachts and should be up to the task. I also appreciate they are built to a 'price' but safety should always come first. We have even seen boat show displays where the boats on the stand have obvious production faults and are falling apart! We would seriously think twice about buying another new yacht as we've found it a stressful and demoralising experience and all due to poor build quality and service.
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Mar 23, 2016 16:11:37 GMT
What is also rather worrying, is that "built to the CE standard" basically means Jack Shi#. It creates a false sense of "so it must be ok" sort of thing. There is a difference in a production fault, like this keel falling off an Oyster 825 last year. This was a one off mistake. Shouldn´t happen, but it did. Lessons learned. For the rest, Oysters are pretty bomb-proof. But what is described in the article on FB and what I see myself on a daily basis is in my view worrying. I.e a good friend of mine runs quite a large charter fleet and in a period of three years, they are phasing all their Jeanneau´s out and moving to Dufours.......(as they head office got a better deal with Dufour). At the moment the fleet is about 50:50 (Dufour/Jeanneau). The Jeanneau´s were not without their issues, especially the newer ones. But the problems they have with these new Dufours, is just beyond words. But, all CE cat A, so technically perfectly fine to sail around the world.......
|
|
|
Post by hoppy on Mar 24, 2016 7:28:48 GMT
At least some of the problems were probably the fault of the commissioning yard (Bimini) and the AP being a wheel pilot sounds also like it was done after it left the factory and probably the owner or commissioning yards fault. As for the rest of the problems The galley forward seems like a pretty stupid idea.
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Mar 24, 2016 8:48:15 GMT
At least some of the problems were probably the fault of the commissioning yard (Bimini) and the AP being a wheel pilot sounds also like it was done after it left the factory and probably the owner or commissioning yards fault. As for the rest of the problems The galley forward seems like a pretty stupid idea. hoppy: but these are not real structural problems. Water and diesel tanks just ripping on the seams, cracks in the hulls and mast post, whole panels coming off, chainplates ripping out, etc. These are structural issues that could endanger lives. The fact that a yard chooses brand items that are too small, can hardly be blamed on the manufacturer of these items. I.e. if one fits a 44 size winch, where it should have been a 48 or 52 size.....you can hardly blame the winch manufacturer when the winch fails, can you. The issue is, that it is getting a structural problem, rather than incidental. That is the worrying thing here. And there is no governing body stepping in to put a halt to this OR to set a minimum standard.
|
|
|
Post by hoppy on Mar 24, 2016 9:15:36 GMT
hoppy : but these are not real structural problems. Water and diesel tanks just ripping on the seams, cracks in the hulls and mast post, whole panels coming off, chainplates ripping out, etc. These are structural issues that could endanger lives. The fact that a yard chooses brand items that are too small, can hardly be blamed on the manufacturer of these items. I.e. if one fits a 44 size winch, where it should have been a 48 or 52 size.....you can hardly blame the winch manufacturer when the winch fails, can you. The issue is, that it is getting a structural problem, rather than incidental. That is the worrying thing here. And there is no governing body stepping in to put a halt to this OR to set a minimum standard. I agree.... My response to the structural and other problems was ... As for the rest of the problems You can take as being criminal
|
|
|
Post by vasko on Mar 24, 2016 12:12:37 GMT
That is the main reason why I do not like newer boats.. things get worse everyday... I hate new boats they are not boats they are park houses which are not design to be moved at all...
I especially searched for boat which is Class 1 - old style ( the 8 classes ) - the current CE class A does not mean anything it barely covers old style class 2...
on top of that I searched for boat with old style thick hull + kevlar - not a new style thin hull with barely any kevlar inside that squicks and squises when under serious seas...
and I wanted a kitchen area aft with large food storage cupboards...
and a boat that do not bang heavily against the wind in rough sea ...
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Mar 24, 2016 18:05:50 GMT
hoppy : but these are not real structural problems. Water and diesel tanks just ripping on the seams, cracks in the hulls and mast post, whole panels coming off, chainplates ripping out, etc. These are structural issues that could endanger lives. The fact that a yard chooses brand items that are too small, can hardly be blamed on the manufacturer of these items. I.e. if one fits a 44 size winch, where it should have been a 48 or 52 size.....you can hardly blame the winch manufacturer when the winch fails, can you. The issue is, that it is getting a structural problem, rather than incidental. That is the worrying thing here. And there is no governing body stepping in to put a halt to this OR to set a minimum standard. I agree.... My response to the structural and other problems was ... As for the rest of the problems You can take as being criminal My mistake, I though meant you were cold!
|
|
|
Post by dralyagmas on Mar 28, 2016 8:27:13 GMT
That is the main reason why I do not like newer boats.. things get worse everyday... I hate new boats they are not boats they are park houses which are not design to be moved at all... I especially searched for boat which is Class 1 - old style ( the 8 classes ) - the current CE class A does not mean anything it barely covers old style class 2... on top of that I searched for boat with old style thick hull + kevlar - not a new style thin hull with barely any kevlar inside that squicks and squises when under serious seas... ... Bit of a side issue but which models had the older style thick hull. I have seen stickers on the sunfast and so 40's (late 90's) saying Kevlar, but keen to know whether this was widespread in all models or just some and when it was passed out?
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Mar 28, 2016 8:53:50 GMT
That is the main reason why I do not like newer boats.. things get worse everyday... I hate new boats they are not boats they are park houses which are not design to be moved at all... I especially searched for boat which is Class 1 - old style ( the 8 classes ) - the current CE class A does not mean anything it barely covers old style class 2... on top of that I searched for boat with old style thick hull + kevlar - not a new style thin hull with barely any kevlar inside that squicks and squises when under serious seas... ... Bit of a side issue but which models had the older style thick hull. I have seen stickers on the sunfast and so 40's (late 90's) saying Kevlar, but keen to know whether this was widespread in all models or just some and when it was passed out? What I remember of it, is that in the late 90´s and earlier 00´s Jeanneau put Kevlar matting into their hulls from 40ft and up. This is the famous "Kevlar Energized" sticker on the transoms. But, as Kevlar and polyester don´t bond very well, there are in fact mats of Kevlar in the whole hull and double mats in the bottom of the hull. Since I have added several thru hull fittings, I can confirm this myself. I.e. when I drilled a hole for the extra engine cooling water intake, I had to drill through 2 layers of Kevlar fibres. When I moved the speed log, I found one layer. And when the bowthruster was installed, it was quite a job sawing through the kevlar fibres. It burnt out on of the jig saws in fact. All this to make the boats lighter and stiffer. I have a nice teak plaque in my boat, with the various bits of hull and deck I cut out over the years. And on the hull ones, the yellow-ish kevlar mat strings are clearly visible. I will try and make a photo of it next week. I don´t know whether or not they still apply this method. But the above is what I know of it.
|
|
|
Post by saxofon on Mar 28, 2016 13:07:38 GMT
In my SO37.1, from 1995, there is also kevlar so at least som of the "smaller" boats have it too. It is both plus and minus to have the kevlar I believe. As On y va says, polyester doesn't bond/penetrate the kevlar so well and in my boat I had delamination in the bottom just in these layer(s). A professional plast firm did the renovation from inside (like removing the inner/upper loose part of the hull actually!) and built it up again. So now it is homogenous, don't sag and is a really firm bottom. And who do not like firm bottoms? Probably this was partly due to the issue with bonding and also not so much stiffeners, I had some extra siffeners made when they anyhow was working with the bottom. So if buying one of these boats with "kevlar energized" labels, I would make sure there is no delamination and it may be good to add some stiffeners.
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Mar 28, 2016 13:36:50 GMT
In my SO37.1, from 1995, there is also kevlar so at least som of the "smaller" boats have it too. It is both plus and minus to have the kevlar I believe. As On y va says, polyester doesn't bond/penetrate the kevlar so well and in my boat I had delamination in the bottom just in these layer(s). A professional plast firm did the renovation from inside (like removing the inner/upper loose part of the hull actually!) and built it up again. So now it is homogenous, don't sag and is a really firm bottom. And who do not like firm bottoms? Probably this was partly due to the issue with bonding and also not so much stiffeners, I had some extra siffeners made when they anyhow was working with the bottom. So if buying one of these boats with "kevlar energized" labels, I would make sure there is no delamination and it may be good to add some stiffeners. Maybe it was from 37 feet and up. I know it was not on the smaller boats initially. There used to be more info on the internet at the time about all this, but now I cannot find it anymore.
|
|
|
Post by vasko on Mar 28, 2016 15:31:56 GMT
That is the main reason why I do not like newer boats.. things get worse everyday... I hate new boats they are not boats they are park houses which are not design to be moved at all... I especially searched for boat which is Class 1 - old style ( the 8 classes ) - the current CE class A does not mean anything it barely covers old style class 2... on top of that I searched for boat with old style thick hull + kevlar - not a new style thin hull with barely any kevlar inside that squicks and squises when under serious seas... ... Bit of a side issue but which models had the older style thick hull. I have seen stickers on the sunfast and so 40's (late 90's) saying Kevlar, but keen to know whether this was widespread in all models or just some and when it was passed out? as far as I'm aware the first Jeanneau with kevlar was Sun Liberty 34 ( 1989-1990-1991) and as Kevlar was new material at the time they kept the thick GRP and in addition added kevlar - and YES I have the sticker at the transom when I searched for my current boat my dilemma was: 1. I do not wanted Bavaria boats any more - enough fighting with element and squicking sounds from the hull and woodwork in high-sea 2. I wanted a serious quality ocean going boat - Class 1 - by the old French classification - not CE class A which is not clear what it actually is. And maximum possible strength of the hull e.g. do not break on hit with a container... 3. I wanted a homey feeling boat - not just a corridor with hard beds 4. I wanted a nice performance under sails boat 5. I wanted a kitchen area which is not obstructing the entrance of a cabin or the movement in the sitting area 6. I wanted good amount of storage space 7. I wanted a beemy beast and very little under 10m as over 10m ayou are treated as someone who has money to waste and under 10m you are a cheap avegerage Joe how is not treated as rich person who can pay x5 from normal price 8. I wanted a two cabin with kingsize beds and two heads boat - for privacy ( if possible on a boat at all) and in the end I narrowed my search to Jeanneau Sun Liberty 34 as it is 3.5x9.98 hull , the underwater part is exactly s the racing JOD 35 with huge living space, have all the mentioned extras and it was a matter of finding a good example
|
|
|
Post by haddock on Jun 11, 2016 7:39:16 GMT
Just read this post and appreciate a bit of a late reply. However, my observations are that we all know that purchasing a new Jenneaubenevaria or any other mass production boat that it is really not designed for a circumnavigation regardless of it's classification. These boats are high volume coastal/med island hopping cruisers. If you want a new vessel to really perform well in a gale in complete safety you have to get your cheque book out and spend some serious dosh.
I have currently a Jeanneau 39i and pick my weather windows carefully when deciding on a passage and would not risk my crew (my family) if I knew we were in for a big blow.
I appreciate what the guys went through and bow down to their experience, expertise and seamanship but why did they put a new vessel which they did not know or have experience on out in such conditions?
I am not excusing the manufactures but they are designing lifestyle boats rather than serious ocean going vessels. However some of the faults are inexcusable but many would have not manifested themselves in an average blow.
Courses for horses I guess.
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Jun 12, 2016 16:23:51 GMT
Just read this post and appreciate a bit of a late reply. However, my observations are that we all know that purchasing a new Jenneaubenevaria or any other mass production boat that it is really not designed for a circumnavigation regardless of it's classification. These boats are high volume coastal/med island hopping cruisers. If you want a new vessel to really perform well in a gale in complete safety you have to get your cheque book out and spend some serious dosh.
I have currently a Jeanneau 39i and pick my weather windows carefully when deciding on a passage and would not risk my crew (my family) if I knew we were in for a big blow.
I appreciate what the guys went through and bow down to their experience, expertise and seamanship but why did they put a new vessel which they did not know or have experience on out in such conditions?
I am not excusing the manufactures but they are designing lifestyle boats rather than serious ocean going vessels. However some of the faults are inexcusable but many would have not manifested themselves in an average blow.
Courses for horses I guess. Yes, Jeanneau´s etc are not HR´s or Oysters, but what worries me most is the build standards and qualities are not improving, like say with cars (bad cars basically don´t exist anymore). I am in the yacht service business and have seen the quality slip a lot in Jeanneau, Beneteau and Bavaria. They built much sturdier boats 15 to 20 years ago. In fact, I would not even consider a (new) Jeanneau of Beneteau anymore. I was tempted buying a Sense 46.......till I saw and sailed it myself. No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by haddock on Jun 13, 2016 5:58:57 GMT
I am not sure car production is a fair comparison. Even though they talk about "production line for boats" this is still a very human resource intensive manufacturing process and the competition relentless. These companies are struggling and making loss year after year yet demand is there but at a price. If we (the buying public) were prepared to pay more for our floating plastic then this would enable the manufactures to stop continually look for cost cutting methods to remain competitive. You could argue that Bavaria started the rot by introducing budget yachts which the other manufactures then had to compete with which has lead to a spiral of decline in quality.
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Jun 13, 2016 7:27:44 GMT
I am not sure car production is a fair comparison. Even though they talk about "production line for boats" this is still a very human resource intensive manufacturing process and the competition relentless. These companies are struggling and making loss year after year yet demand is there but at a price. If we (the buying public) were prepared to pay more for our floating plastic then this would enable the manufactures to stop continually look for cost cutting methods to remain competitive. You could argue that Bavaria started the rot by introducing budget yachts which the other manufactures then had to compete with which has lead to a spiral of decline in quality. The latter about Bavaria (and let´s not forget Hanse) is exactly my thought. Second hand Jeanneau´s and Beneteau´s became more and more difficult to sell (and I sold several) as for that money you could buy a gleaming new Bavaria. My comparison with the car industry was mainly aimed that there the end product only improves and improves. As I said bad cars basically don´t exist anymore, whereas bad boats........more and more.
|
|
|
Post by iancymru on Jun 13, 2016 12:00:08 GMT
Its a good thing to compare it to the car industry as it highlights the lack of regulation in boat building which in turn allows the boat manufacturers to churn out boats with ocean going certification when they clearly not suitable. The car industry has to jump through a lot more tightly regulated hoops to get a car on the road and to stay on the road. Plus you have to be licensed to drive it and insured. The CE coding is dangerously misleading as I cannot understand how a one compartment boat with a set of lightweight perspex doors with out harness points/life lines a anchor, flares, extinguishers etc etc etc can be sold and classified as ocean going and navigated by a complete novice.
|
|
|
Post by haddock on Jun 14, 2016 6:30:35 GMT
Guys I agree with all your sentiment, but it is up to the regulators to rigorously apply standards to classification, perhaps a new trusted standard of quality/safety should be developed which all manufactures must adhere to and comply. This would inevitably push the price of the vessels up but all would be in the same boat (excuse the pun). This would probably put new boats beyond the reach of most mere mortals and boost the second-hand market. However the manufactures would be at even greater risk of failure given the fragility of ever weakening balance sheets.
Tough one.
I go back to my original sentiment is to treat the budget end of the yacht market vessels as coastal cruisers and leisure boats and for us skippers never to test these vessels to their supposed limits.
Saying all that, I got caught in some quite rough conditions off the Spanish mainland early in the year on a 39i and she took a pounding for a good eight hours with no ill effect. However, I was never out of sight of land if the s**t did hit the fan.
Mike
|
|
|
Post by MickeyB on Jun 14, 2016 7:28:29 GMT
I think we mustn't blame the regulators/manufacturers too much. The yachts are safe, are reliable (mostly). The skipper is the biggest problem and potential weak point in most cases I feel. A serious blue water yacht may have a sloppy skipper who removed the safety lines, never checked his flares and secured his liferaft so well that it takes an hour to dig out of the locker. This is not the fault of the yacht or the designers. I favour a serious skipper on a modern Jeanneau than an idiot in an Oyster etc.
However, car analogy again. I have a Toyota Rav4 (which I love for my lifestyle). It has 4 wheel drive (sort of) and can take me to beaches here in Malta that only off roaders can get to. Makes me happy. The LandRover guys here all look at me and say its not really an off roader - but with care and a little forward thinking, I can go most places. Most - not all. I (the skipper) know the limit. If I push it, I will break it, warp the frame or more. I can if I want to, but I choose not to. If I get stuck somewhere I can probably make it out somehow, but the car is not meant to do serious off roading for prolonged periods. But it can do it - for short periods.
As to safety - the Rav4 is safe. Full stop. Probably more so than the LandRover teams who scoff me.
I feel the analogy is roughly the same - with the big exception being WHEN things go wrong. If I break the Rav, I get out and wait for the tow truck. Not so with boats - you are essentially self reliant.
If the build of the yacht is strong - but they lowered the price by supplying cheap plastic cockpit doors, then so be it. 95% of these doors will do the job perfectly well. If going offshore, in SERIOUS areas then the skipper must make the choice to upgrade the doors. This is not skimping in my opinion by Jeanneau - it is plain sense. Don't supply cars in Malta with snow chains - you haven't needed them in the last 50 years (probably more - cannot be bothered to Google). If I take the Maltese car to the Alps - it is my job to ensure the car can cope (and if going in the summer I still probably don't need the chains - skipper choice again).
I am not of huge financial resources. My boat of 55k dented my finance seriously. There is no way I could have afforded a more solidly built vessel ready for 6 months of storm force 12. But I could get mine, and I have been in a top end 10 with her, and she was great. But F10 is rare here. Very. And for me to be out in it is even rarer. For that once in 5 year occasion, where I choose to go out, I think my Jeanneau is perfect.
If only they would stop with the cheap thru-hulls - there is no excuse there.
(Sorry if this sounds like a rant - it isn't, it is just my view point. If you want a rant - ask me about sailing qualifications!)
Mike
|
|
|
Post by vasko on Jun 14, 2016 21:46:31 GMT
I do not think excessive regulations are good at all - e.g. I prefer freedom - including freedom of choice - e.g. the EU has gone lately to REALLY excessive regulation effort - it is not helping anymore it is actually preventing the business and everyday life .. I wonder when the EXTREMELY WELL PAID eurocrats will decide to regulated our sex life also.. ( remember the soviets has introduced sex regulations in the beginning we are slowly becoming ESSR - e.g. European Soviet Socialist Republics.... full of regulations and rules and agreements and paper and paper and paper... we are sea going people - we love freedom
|
|
|
Post by vasko on Jun 14, 2016 21:59:58 GMT
Mike - your boat is quite a good one! 34.2 is VERY SAFE BOAT and well designed and tough - do not compare it with the new charter company designed boats look at this one - how much living and cockpit space they have managed to squeeze in 30 feet boat : www.legendyachtsuk.co.uk/#!legend-yachts-31/c1k8l I inspected the boat in details on the Southampton boat show and it is amazing how nice and large living space is this boat - , but I do not really believe it is designed for sailing - I checked the size of the winches and mast and boom and rigging - it is childish honestly, looks to me that the purpose of the sails on this boat is to make her look nicer.. not to be used for sailing with wind
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Jun 15, 2016 20:39:44 GMT
I do not think excessive regulations are good at all - e.g. I prefer freedom - including freedom of choice - e.g. the EU has gone lately to REALLY excessive regulation effort - it is not helping anymore it is actually preventing the business and everyday life .. I wonder when the EXTREMELY WELL PAID eurocrats will decide to regulated our sex life also.. ( remember the soviets has introduced sex regulations in the beginning we are slowly becoming ESSR - e.g. European Soviet Socialist Republics.... full of regulations and rules and agreements and paper and paper and paper... we are sea going people - we love freedom Are you on some form of pills Vasko? I read a lot of bollox on forums, this beats most it.
|
|
|
Post by On y va on Jun 15, 2016 20:40:14 GMT
I do not think excessive regulations are good at all - e.g. I prefer freedom - including freedom of choice - e.g. the EU has gone lately to REALLY excessive regulation effort - it is not helping anymore it is actually preventing the business and everyday life .. I wonder when the EXTREMELY WELL PAID eurocrats will decide to regulated our sex life also.. ( remember the soviets has introduced sex regulations in the beginning we are slowly becoming ESSR - e.g. European Soviet Socialist Republics.... full of regulations and rules and agreements and paper and paper and paper... we are sea going people - we love freedom Are you on some form of pills Vasko? I read a lot of bollox on forums, this beats most it
|
|
|
Post by vasko on Jun 15, 2016 23:00:14 GMT
Are you on some form of pills Vasko? I read a lot of bollox on forums, this beats most it pills hmmm .. interesting idea I haven't been lately to Amsterdam waiting for connection flight and trying the amazing cakes that make you loose track of time .. may be I should reconsider changing the paracetamol from Boots with Amsterdam cakes Yes - agree I'm exaggerating.. but still I have spent the first 20 years of my life behind the iron curtain of the socialist block ( in Bulgaria) and still remember very well what is to live in a very well/fully regulated word... in some point the regulations start to regulate them selves and the world the regulator disconnects from the world of the normal people remember the King from the Antoine de Saint-Exupéry book - The Little Prince - ergo - enforcing rules that people do not follow lead to the King to not be a King e.g. excessive regulations lead to will in the people to get rid of the regulators sooner or later... I prefer "guidance" something that you can decide to follow as good practice or not...
|
|