More 17 barrel interior questions
Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:44 pm
I am following "Seat Cushions for a 1940 17' Barrelback" with interest. My 1942 17 Deluxe had its interior "modernized" in the 50s with a red vinyl interior. I have very little left from the original interior. I had a spring frame from (presumably) the front seat although it was so rusted a fell into pieces when I picked it up. The seat backs appeared to be filled with Kapok. The rear seat components were 100% absent.
My hull card, 71938, calls for Aquamarine Leatherette. As I understand it (and verified by Brian in the post above) the Leatherette available today (aka Vinyl) is not even close to the original. I am trying to figure out a plan as to which way I'll go.
My boat had a couple of scraps of the original Leatherette, behind the side pockets in the front cockpit.
The scraps were certainly in poor shape...and very likely way off color. I just wish I knew "how far" off color. The original pieces also have a very distinctive "grain" to them. This grain does not look like the "pebbled" finish of many modern day vinyls. In fact my Leatherette scrap feels as much like a fabric as it does a "plastic". It almost seems like a fabric with a very thin "veneer" of synthetic material. I know that "fabric with a very thing veneer of plastic" is essentially similar to a modern day vinyl, but when I say thin veneer, I mean really thin.
So here are my questions:
What the heck is Leatherette anyway. I have asked many, but I have yet to get the scientific answer I am looking for. Since Leatherette was offered on some of the more bargain hulls (my 17' Deluxe), while other models (19' Customs) continued with Leather, one could draw several conclusions:
1. Leatherette is not Leather. Why else would CC have two different materials in the same year?
2. Leatherette was less costly than Leather. Is this an assumption I am making that may be incorrect? I can't think of why else Leatherette would have been used instead of Leather other than for cost reasons....although....What if this new Leatherette stuff was a futuristic man made material that would not fade, crack or otherwise detoriate as quick as Leather. Maybe Leatherette wasn't cheaper at all...maybe Chris-Craft, being the leader they were, wanted to migrate to these new "futuristic" materials?
3. Assuming someone can answer what Leatherette is (was), does anyone know who the supplier was for Chris-Craft? Could this company still be in business? Next thing you know, we'll find out it was NAFI, the automotive industry supplier, National Automotive Fiber Industries, who later purchased Chris-Craft. Wouldn't that be strange.
4. Is is possibly to replicate Leatherette using any vinyl-like product? Maybe Leatherette looked the way it did and felt the way it did because it really wasn't made quite like vinyl at all?
5. I think Russeloid preceded Leatherette, based on hull cards from the late 30s. What is Russeloid? Not generally speaking....but specifically....does anyone know? How was it different from Leatherette? I guess the Russeloid...ending in "oid" brings to mind Celluloid, which was one of the very early plastics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic
Celluloids then yielded to other advances in plastics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic
I guess my labored point is that if Russeloid was an early "plastic" and Leatherette was an early "plastic" then what are the differences between the two?
Can Leatherette be made to look and feel like Leatherette without resorting to some old school process?
These questions are ridiculous at some level...but I just have to know!
My hull card, 71938, calls for Aquamarine Leatherette. As I understand it (and verified by Brian in the post above) the Leatherette available today (aka Vinyl) is not even close to the original. I am trying to figure out a plan as to which way I'll go.
My boat had a couple of scraps of the original Leatherette, behind the side pockets in the front cockpit.
The scraps were certainly in poor shape...and very likely way off color. I just wish I knew "how far" off color. The original pieces also have a very distinctive "grain" to them. This grain does not look like the "pebbled" finish of many modern day vinyls. In fact my Leatherette scrap feels as much like a fabric as it does a "plastic". It almost seems like a fabric with a very thin "veneer" of synthetic material. I know that "fabric with a very thing veneer of plastic" is essentially similar to a modern day vinyl, but when I say thin veneer, I mean really thin.
So here are my questions:
What the heck is Leatherette anyway. I have asked many, but I have yet to get the scientific answer I am looking for. Since Leatherette was offered on some of the more bargain hulls (my 17' Deluxe), while other models (19' Customs) continued with Leather, one could draw several conclusions:
1. Leatherette is not Leather. Why else would CC have two different materials in the same year?
2. Leatherette was less costly than Leather. Is this an assumption I am making that may be incorrect? I can't think of why else Leatherette would have been used instead of Leather other than for cost reasons....although....What if this new Leatherette stuff was a futuristic man made material that would not fade, crack or otherwise detoriate as quick as Leather. Maybe Leatherette wasn't cheaper at all...maybe Chris-Craft, being the leader they were, wanted to migrate to these new "futuristic" materials?
3. Assuming someone can answer what Leatherette is (was), does anyone know who the supplier was for Chris-Craft? Could this company still be in business? Next thing you know, we'll find out it was NAFI, the automotive industry supplier, National Automotive Fiber Industries, who later purchased Chris-Craft. Wouldn't that be strange.
4. Is is possibly to replicate Leatherette using any vinyl-like product? Maybe Leatherette looked the way it did and felt the way it did because it really wasn't made quite like vinyl at all?
5. I think Russeloid preceded Leatherette, based on hull cards from the late 30s. What is Russeloid? Not generally speaking....but specifically....does anyone know? How was it different from Leatherette? I guess the Russeloid...ending in "oid" brings to mind Celluloid, which was one of the very early plastics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic
Celluloids then yielded to other advances in plastics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic
I guess my labored point is that if Russeloid was an early "plastic" and Leatherette was an early "plastic" then what are the differences between the two?
Can Leatherette be made to look and feel like Leatherette without resorting to some old school process?
These questions are ridiculous at some level...but I just have to know!