[C38] Cutlass Bearing Strut Faring

Sun Nov 14 23:06:04 EST 2010

Steve,
Now that you already took out the pedestal, have you seen a
reinforcement recommendation for the pedestal by Catalina on the tech info
on the C38 web? They said that we should install a couple of aluminum plates
right next to the pulleys in order to stiffen a little bit more the
pedestal.

Max

2010/11/14 Steve Smolinske <SSmolinske at rainierrubber.com>

> When we pulled Pergrine upon purchase, they slide some shims down the shaft
> as well for the very reasons discussed here.   In the spring we are putting
> on a new rudder and I will be adressing this same issue at that time.  I
> just finished rebuilding the pedestal and am planning on writing an article
> about the entire steering system repair/rebuild after we finish with the new
> rudder and post.  One thing I can add at this point that I found out from
> Edson is that our boats originally came with bronze pins for the 4" pulleys
> on the crossed wire idler, they recommend replacing them with stainless
> steel as they have seen substantial wear on the bronze.   Mine did have
> enough wear to prevent the pulley from sliding freely side to side outside
> of the small groove that was worn in the pin. Edson has the stainless pins
> available as a replacement part.  Pretty pricey about $40 bucks each.
>
> Regarding the Catalina smile I recently had a discussion with another
> sailor on a theory as to why the cracks might appear.  We repaired ours last
> spring, grinding out the crack to the hull, we thought we went deep enough
> and wide enough to fix the problem, well the crack came back but not near as
> severe as it had been, on the opposite side where we were not as agressive
> it came back to the same extent before the repair.  We feel we can go more
> aggressive on our repair this spring and stop it maybe.   The conversation
> regarding cause centered around the forces applied to the boat when
> adjusting the back stay, As we are aware it possible to crank the backstay
> enough to inhibit doors from closing properly below he felt it didnt take
> much to move the bow thus the rest of the boat it wouldnt take much to
> introduce a crack.   I know others without backstays get the smile too so Im
> sure there are a number of reasons that could all be responsible.
>
>
> Steve
> #312 Peregrine
> Seattle
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: listserve-bounces at catalina38.org on behalf of Chuck Finn
> Sent: Sun 11/14/2010 9:54 AM
> To: Catalina 38 Listserve
> Subject: Re: [C38] Cutlass Bearing Strut Faring
>
>
>
> Excellent discussion!  This is why our Association is so important to
> all of us!  Thank you everyone for contributing!
>
> Here is what I know from my research on this over the years.
>
> 1.   I seriously looked into shortening my keel a few years back as
> there is a set of locks leading the the St. Lawrence Seaway that allow
> drafts less than six feet.    Mars Metals out of Canada has made
> "torpedo" bulbs for C38s and has the mold in storage.  Their calculation
> was I recall, that a five foot draft would require an additional 500
> pounds of lead.
>
> 2. The Yankee 38s did not come in a shoal keel as far as I can tell.
> But, their fin keel design was different than Butler's, so we can
> probably surmise that Catalina experimented a bit with the keel in the
> beginning.  I certainly would if I were them and kept seeing the
> "Catalina Smile!"
>
> 3. Until this discussion, I had not seen a shoal draft version of our
> boats that had the keel faired the way Tom T. describes.  The ones I had
> seen looked pretty much like the 1981 model at this website:
> http://boats.iboats.com/1981-catalina-38/664532.html
>
> 4.  When I was investigating a shoal draft modification,  I had been
> told by someone at Catalina that the shoal keel bolt configuration was
> the same as the deep draft keel.  About 10 or so years back, I recall
> that Catalina even had some shoal drafts keels available....  I have no
> way of verifying any of this other than my old and sometimes faulty memory!
>
> My best guess then is Catalina had two keel molds and could choose which
> one to bolt on to their standard hull based upon the order.  Fairing the
> keel to the hull is a labor intensive job, which probably allowed the
> workers and designers some latitude to experiment.   And that is what
> they did.....   probably to see if they could reduce the prop walk.   I
> don't think there is any structural aspect to this modification as the
> two support points for the prop shaft are the motor/transmission mount
> and the cutlass bearing (packing gland is about keeping water out and
> does not support).
>
> Tom, how did you keep this long shaft tunnel clean?  Zebra mussels up
> here would soon pack this tunnel over a summer.
>
> Thanks again to everyone who contributes!
> Chuck Finn
> Commodore
>
>
>
> On 11/14/2010 10:27 AM, Max Soto wrote:
> > What a Dilemma!!
> >
> > Dan, do you have a pic from Blonde Starnger's keel??? There are only
> > 13 boat from Renata to Blonde Starnger, and both are 1981 models..
> >
> >
> >
> > Renata's keel with skeg is the most different one that I have
> > seen.I've been collecting pics from C38's for sale, because Estancia
> > was such in bad shape and modified when I bought it, that I needed
> > lots of pics in order to tell what was original and what wasn't, and
> > of course to get tips from other  boats..
> >
> > Tom, I'm going to put a production change on the table for the
> > following reason:
> >
> > The  silhouette on the original brochure does shows a slightly larger
> > keel trunk, and one of the most notable differences is the back edge
> > of the keel (just forgot the technical name!) is perpendicular to the
> > water line. Let's call it straight!!!!  The deep keel version is
> > angled, even if the keel draft has been reduced, you'll be able to
> > tell because of this, but if you look at the attached pic from Chute
> > the Breeze or the other one I sent a couple of days a go, it looks
> > just like the shoal keel on the brochure, straight down! without an
> > angle, that's why I always tought that I had these pics from shoal
> > draft versions!
> >
> >
> > One more thing, Estancia is 1982, and came with the 1982 brochure
> > (which is older than the one on the C38 web), and shows no  skeg either.
> >
> > My opinion, evidence shows two shoal draft versions, so who will be
> > able to confirm a production change???????????
> > Just found another  shoal draft pic on Calatlinaowners.com, has been
> > attached also..
> >
> > Tom, there is  a known cure for the loss of a C38, but it requires
> > lot's of money in order to get a newer and bigger boat!!!! Just make
> > sure that this boat is faster than a C38, other wise, not worth it....LOL
> > Regards,
> > Max
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Listserve mailing list
> Listserve at catalina38.org
> http://catalina38.org/mailman/listinfo/listserve_catalina38.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Listserve mailing list
> Listserve at catalina38.org
> http://catalina38.org/mailman/listinfo/listserve_catalina38.org
>
>

-- 
Max Soto
C38 #198 ESTANCIA
Puntarenas, Costa Rica
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://catalina38.org/pipermail/listserve_catalina38.org/attachments/20101114/aa8be383/attachment-0001.htm>