Nacra 5.8 demasted while sailing

You think the foam in the hulls could make it break up in the waves? I couldn't really imagine the large forward crossbar buckling due to the homemade wing seat addition but I understand concerns. What would you say this is worth and do you think it really does have a dangerously high chance of breaking up in ocean waves? I've broke the forestay twice on my 17 (in different places, had two sets of cables but neither were new), I like the boat but it's so small and sits so low in the water that I don't like it on the ocean even if the mast would stay up for once. Also the motor mount hits the water all the time unless you're heeling on one hull, also there's really no place to mount or even temporarily put the battery on it. Which really is needed to get throught causeways channels and bridges.

Also the hobies are so heavy of fiberglass with such a sharp hull that the waves really seem to beat them up because they're always trying to crash down and through the water instead of being on top of it. I noticed that the hulls on this nacra are very thin relatively, but seem solid, they are definitely not sandwhich type. It is a 5.8 99% sure pretty sure the sail said 5.8. If it means anything the mast has cable tensioners on the sides like a lot of the bigger boats have. I was gonna try to get it for 2800. But you think it's probably not worth much over 1000?

I've kind of given up on the hobies. I had the masthead rivets fail on a double pulley 16 due to the bubble in a capsize that wasn't even rough, the 16s pitchpole, the 17 sits too low, cables break, cables seem too long even though they measure out, they're too heavy, too slow, and too low capacity. The nacra seemed bettter. Upon my real life inspection it didn't look terribly scary. The guy who did the mods is aparantly an aircraft engineer. It's kind of back and forth and back with this boat. At first it looks good because it's been re gelcoed, then it looks a little scary when you look closer, but then in real life it seems okay again.

Edited by biscaynecatsailor on Apr 11, 2013 - 12:47 PM.

I wouldn't mess with any boat that has had the hulls filled with foam, period.

Too much stiffness will make it break up? Shaking the whole boat as well as tapping it (only the parts around the tramp have the filling, the fronts are hollow) it feels more solid and stiff than most any hobie.

The problem with foam is that it will Absorb water. There is no question about that. This boat will gain serious weight over its lifetime.

It's had the foam in it for quite some time. I believe it's similar to great stuff, not styrofoam, I don't think it would absorb water, I believe it's a closed cell type of foam.

Anyway if this boat doesn't happen where can I buy "heavier cables" for the 17 as I was told to do. Or do I have to make them myself at west marine or elsewhere? I want to be able to crash and bash through ocean waves, here's the big one, SIN QUE I sit with the knowledge that something is going to break for sure. Actually I was in the process of making some mods to the 17, double standing rigging I'll post pics 😉

biscaynecatsailor wrote: It's had the foam in it for quite some time. I believe it's similar to great stuff, not styrofoam, I don't think it would absorb water, I believe it's a closed cell type of foam.

Expandable foam in the hulls is bad, very bad.

Take the rest of the issues raised by Philip seriously, he knows the Nacra 5.8.

The Nacra 5.8 is a great boat, but maybe not that particular one.

If you could weigh the boat fully rigged I'm sure you would find it extremely overweight.

Well it was strapped to the trailer. I was almost certain I was going to get it, but thanks for realizing me of the gravity of these "modifications" maybe I will go look at it closer, unstrap it and see how heavy it "feels." From prior familiarity with closed cell building insulation, I really thought this stuff was not supossed to have moisture problems.

try Salty Dog Marine......

http://www.saltydogmarine.com/

or Murrays......

http://www.murrays.com/

In both cases, call them up and let them know you want to go with heavier standing rigging.

R

But is this not a good idea for the fact that it's best to have the cables as the weak point? I mean I certainly don't want the mount ripping out of the fiberglass or the tang to come off. The ocean is serious. and yesterday was only a 12-16 e'sou'easterly, maybe, maybe a rare gust of 20, and the boat was pretty rockin in the waves. But alas these are beach cats, meant for the ocean, right? It's just that going through the ~5 foot curlers where the outgoing tide met the wind waves at the channel mouth just didn't seem like any stiff non inflatable boat could be built with the intention of handling that.

The weight is not a huge concern, here's the question:

Does the foam in the hulls increase the chance that they will break apart or that the boat will otherwise catastrophically fail under heavy sail/seas?

As for the mast, couldn't the rivets be redone, possibly a size larger. Hand pop riveting isn't terribly involved.

Thanks.

biscaynecatsailor wrote: The weight is not a huge concern, here's the question:

Does the foam in the hulls increase the chance that they will break apart or that the boat will otherwise catastrophically fail under heavy sail/seas?

As for the mast, couldn't the rivets be redone, possibly a size larger. Hand pop riveting isn't terribly involved.

Thanks.

Weight IS a huge concern when you make a beachcat heavier than it was designed. Heavier means it displaces more water and increases stresses everywhere. So yes, in my opinion a boat partially filled with foam is more likely to have major problems.

The other big concern with foam is that it is often put in to "fix" problems like soft spots or leaks, and once the foam is in it makes it extremely difficult to fix properly.

Also, in the case of this boat, those hatches, look like a problem. In all but the lightest winds and smoothest water they will spend time submerged. If they leak at all they will fill with water.

I'm going to go take a closer look at it.

I think your biggest concern with these mods is that you're also planning to use the boat in the surf. That will be extremely stressful (just go watch some GT300 vids) and any spots that are significantly different stiffness, especially if they're heavier as well, aren't going to work out for long while taking a beating. Same thing with inspection ports in front of the main beam...actually, imo, ports in front of the main beam essentially make the hulls disposable. I haven't looked closely at the pics, though, just going by what ppl here have said.

Your post about using the motor and battery, though, demonstrate that your needs are clearly so different from mine that I can't really comment further about what would or wouldn't work for you. But regardless, seriously, the surf will likely sink that boat.

Good luck,

Someone that sunk a cat and swam back to shore.

I went and looked at the pics..'half full' of foam sounds insane, but after looking, I think that regardless of the foam, as Philip said, the dolphin striker, inspection ports, and holes in the main beam just inside of the hull connections def make that thing soon-to-be-bowless if it goes through much surf. That's not to slam anyone's boat, and the paint is pretty, but I know I break things much sturdier than that looks quite often.

The spinnaker tang is noteworthy to me...I bet that boat's had an interesting life.

biscaynecatsailor wrote: The weight is not a huge concern, here's the question:

Does the foam in the hulls increase the chance that they will break apart or that the boat will otherwise catastrophically fail under heavy seas?

Thanks.

The answer to that depends.

When the foam is installed, it expands, no surprise there. However the foam CAN create pressure. Pressure is a Bad thing. There needs to be resistance to flow to create pressure, meaning that this depends how it was installed. In this case we do not know that. If the foam is contained, or installed in such a high quantity that it cannot "vent" properly, it can push on everything in the hulls. No different than blowing up hulls with an air. There are numerous people on the forum who have destroyed hulls with a shop vac putting some air into the hulls looking for leaks. I have personally seen a boat in Florida that had rippled hulls from foam. In this case it was a severe delamination problem that the owner was making a last ditch effort to repair.

Later in the boats life, no matter how the foam was installed, it will take on water. This adds weight, ALOT of weight. Ask a Hobie monocat owner. My monocat started life at 200lbs, when I threw it in the dump it was more like 600lbs. So your stressing the boat more all of the time with the extra weight.

The damp foam creates another problem, your inside of the boat will be permanently be damp. This causes blisters and other fiberglass problems.

Check out my P19, makes you second quess port holes in front of the beam.

Edited by bacho on Apr 11, 2013 - 05:29 PM.

Pics coming soon. I think you will see that while the boat may not be great, the mods are not as bad as you all thought. Maybe not by a long shot.

Three issues we'll adress:

Mast rivet corrosion
Hole cut out in main crossbar for wingseat
Stuffing, which is medium density polyeurethane

As for earlier concerns, the boat measures about 19' 2" hulls only, 20 on the nose including rudder frame but not rudder itself. It is not sandwhich core, it is just fiberglass, probably pre 85. Fiberglass seems to be in great shape, boat is very stiff, no soft spots in hollow areas; whole area in front of front crossbar.

voila nothing is cut out of crossbar. Seat assembly is stainless steel, plates were rounded to meet curvature of bar, and gasket was added to prevent bi-metal corrosion.

Pictures don't show well but mast is not corroded. Clear silicone was added around all rivets, tang, etc to ensure positive buoyancy. One thing to note about the mast is that is has tension cables:

Daggerboards were home made going only by pictures, originals were lost or broken:

Homemade motor mount better that chelea one:

Hull is thin, this shows some of the medium density polyeurethan that spilled over into here. It was applied liquid, the boat does feel a bit heavy, but not much over 400 pounds.

Edited by biscaynecatsailor on Apr 11, 2013 - 11:20 PM.

Originally you sounded like it might be too much money, which was confirmed here. Now it seems your tryin to sell it to us.

Biscayne, if as you say the boat is all glass this is a definite plus for a cruiser. The mods are well done and well thought out. If what you want is a cruiser, this boat will fill that bill.

The additional weight of the mods plus crew load is going to increase the draft considerable. Adding the wings increases the righting moment, this is not ALWAYS a good thing. If you INCREASE the righting moment and INCREASE the draft and then......................... stay with me..................... fully power the sail, you overload the standing rigging because the boat cannot spill any air by heeling. This in turn overloads all the tangs and attachment points.

If you just want to cruise (which is pretty much all this boat is good for), then downsize the sail plan and accept that hull flying isn't in the cards. Downsizing the sail plan will bring the rig loading back within the tolerances the original designer drafted.

We all pay for our education, one way or another, advice is also worth what you pay for it (you ain't paying much on this board.) Let us know a year from now if this boat was 'a good deal.'

Probably with four or more people flying the hull won't be in the plan, besides that kind of wind doesn't happen often. But for sailing with one or two people the added weight might actually be nice for keeping the boat more steady and controlled. I know adding the little motor/mount/battery to the 17 made it noticably more balanced than without. I know soloing on a H16 you have to be really on the ball in a good wind and it's hard to even get them going.

I understand one of the other major concerns here is the access ports in front of the forward crossbar? They are not original, or they are and it was just a bad design?

Edited by biscaynecatsailor on Apr 12, 2013 - 08:00 AM.

They were probably installed to make a repair on the beam bolts or to drain water that may now be trapped in front of the foam section.

Have you considered a Getaway?

Boats don't seem to come up a lot here. I basically just search CL SFL and Keys for keyword hobie or nacra now and then. Hobie getaway is pretty new. I thought it was like a watered down replacement for the 18, also with no dagger boards like a 16, therefore it must pitchpole like a 16 with stubborn hulls that don't like to go forward.

Someone actually told me you can find better deals around tampa area where a lot of older people are selling them cheap because they're one foot on a banana peel other in the grave and don't really need the money anyway. Don't really like to make that kind of a trip if there's even a significant chance of just ending up looking at a boat and not even getting it.

Edited by biscaynecatsailor on Apr 12, 2013 - 09:52 AM.

Same thought as yurdle, consider the Getaway, rotomolded plastic hulls, almost indestructible, cooler hatches, wing seats, roller furling jib, forward tramp, the hulls are high volume hulls and the boat sits high on the water.

Just to bring you up to speed on the Hobie 16, although the boat is over 30 years old, there has never been a more successful design, the distinct banana shape was specifically for handling California surf, not the baby waves you get in Florida, but 4'-6' waves. The jib on the H16 was over-sized, more like a Genoa, and it is this over-sized jib as well as the position of the bridle wires up on the bow that gives the H16 it's pitch-pole tendency. Most professionally set-up H16's have foot straps on the rear of the hulls, about 8"-12" forward of the transom, so that they can trap off the back of the boat on a screaming reach, 1 foot in the strap, the other foot braced against the rear beam. Been there, done that, nothing more exciting other than sitting on a sidewinder and asking your kid brother to light the fuse....... 👿

But the Getaway would seem to suite your situation, can carry 4-6 adults + beverage + gear and can still get up some good speed, you can island hop, drive it up onto beaches, furl the jib in a big blow, add an anchor, it has no boom, did I mention it has good speed.....???

http://www.hobiecat.com/sailboats/getaway/

Well they told me the access holes in front of forward crossbar came with the boat.

Edited by biscaynecatsailor on Apr 12, 2013 - 05:22 PM.

It's a clever man who learns from his own mistakes, but it's the wise man who learns from the mistakes of others......William White Braid (my Dad)

Catsailor, despite the advice of many more experienced sailors, you seem to be set on this particular N5.8 for whatever reason. By all means then, go ahead and acquire the boat, ultimately, it is your decision. Please keep us updated.

R

I probably won't even have to. Just listen to a coast guard scanner or something. 😀

"uh lets intercept this unidentified floating object, looks to be some kind of a cuba contraption...oh no just a broken up ghetto rigged nacra that someone was stupid enough to buy and sail alone in the ocean without even a cell phone on."

Some sailing lessons would be a wiser use of your funds. Thanks for the entertainment in this thread!

Last issue I forgot. Mast corrosion. Here's some better pics tell me how bad you think it is. Remember the rivets all have clear silicone which shows more poorly with the camera flash than in real life.

The silicone on some of those fittings is just around the fitting to prevent water getting in. And that's good. It isn't separating the two metals, though.

No question, even without the pics, that an aluminum mast with stainless fittings in a coastal area will have galvanic corrosion. If there is a question, it is 'how bad?'

To me, that just falls in the 'everything's got a price' category.

I like the shackle in the first pic.