Page 1 of 3

Be prepared for a series of dumb questions/new to hobby

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 5:21 pm
by dpw1959
Ok, don't say I didn't warn you. I have been admiring antique wooden Chris Craft for probably 28 years now. I first saw one of these beauties while I was on vacation at Squam Lake NH and have been salivating ever since.
I have only owned a fiberglass boat once before and that was some 20 years ago. But now, I am giving SERIOUS thought to purchasing a 1956 Chris Craft Sportsman. I will fess up that I know VERY LITTLE about the upkeep needed or how to even drive one of these at this point. But like many of you I have long since caught the bug and want to make this purchase. The boat in question has already had a marine surveyor look at it and they have only found minor issues, also I have a fair amount of history on the boat that includes a 2008 partial restoration that included new decks, frame, side planking, transom and floor. The engine got new wiring but needed nothing else according to the restoration company. It has the original bottom that has been caulked and is supposed to be pretty tight and require minimum soaking. The boat looks very nice to my novice eye after looking at junkers all the way up to show winners.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 5:38 pm
by Wood Commander
One word caught my eye immediately- original bottom that has been "caulked"! What is the name of the restoration shop?

Generally speaking, caulking bottom planks is a big NO NO, especially on original bottoms. Chris Craft never caulked their bottoms and they are not designed to be caulked. Caulking can, under certain circumstances, cause severe damage to the hull. Often caulking is done in an attempt to get a litle more service out of a tired bottom, but it can be a serious mistake.

Tell us more about the history of the boat and it's partial restoration.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 6:06 pm
by dpw1959
The boat restoration company does look reputable based on its website and the images of the boats it is in process restoring, I don't want to throw them under the bus at this point. I may have misunderstood about what was caulked and will try to get more info from the previous owner. The boat changed hands since the 2008 restoration and I have an email out to the owner that had it during the restoration and he is actually a member of this organization, so again not throwing anybody under the bus just yet due to what could be my ignorance. The survey quotes: "Batten-planked, double planked bottom, half decks and combings. The vessel was found to be in good condition with bright finish painted deck seams and apparent good construction. Bottom condition is original with seams caulked with 5200 adhesive sealant. Inner-ply is of plywood rather than diagonal inner planking, no evidence of rot or decay noted".

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 6:41 pm
by mfine
The issue with the bottom is at some point it will need to be replaced which is a very labor intensive and expensive process. As was just discussed elsewhere, one professional shop that will do a COMPLETE replacement including kell, chimes frame members and the bottom itself charges $1000 a foot. I have heard simmilar rates from other shops as well. You may or may not be able to do it yourself in which case you have several thousand in materials and many hours of your time.

Now the big question is when. There can be significant hidden damage that can not be seen until you start ripping the old bottom off. There can be hidden rot, broken screws, enlarged screw holes, wood weakened by age and oil and so forth. On the flip side, the bottom could still be plenty strong, and it may not catastrophically fail for another decade or two or maybe more. There are people here who would put a new bottom on right away. Others are willing to take the risks and keep using the original bottoms. If you are going to boat alone offshore, I would definitely advise you to get a new bottom. If you are going to boat in a 4 foot deep pool with a bunch of life guard watching, I would say don't replace it until it sinks. Anywhere in between is more of a judgement call. This is not to scare you away, but you need to be informed of the potential risks and expenses of a wood boat bottom.

Another "issue" is yearly maintenance. Varnish will not hold up forever, especially with UV exposure. You may need to add a coat or two every year or two to maintain UV protection. Or you may need more or less depending on where you live, how you store it etc.

Finally, what engine is in it and what is the condition? Replacing or rebuilding an engine is not cheap (I am doing that now) but all engines will need it eventually.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 6:49 pm
by dpw1959
The engine is a KLC, 6 cylinder water cooled marine engine. The survey states it was run at 250rpm and brought to temprature with the transmission engaged. All running gear appeared in good order except the head gasket had small bubbles and was replaced.
The survey suggests that two coats of varnish is needed within the next two years, depending on use of the boat. Also a battery box is suggested within the battery compartment. Supposedly the restoration was around $8000 in 2008.

Bottom

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 6:55 pm
by gbraker
I read your post & you mentioned that it had a 5200 caulk. If it does indeed have a no soak bottom with 5200 as the sealent, then it may be something that you don't have to worry about.

Many rebuilt boats today have either a 5200 bottom or a epoxy bottom. In either case they are usually no soak.

It may be a good deal.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 7:01 pm
by dpw1959
I am almost 100% certain that it does NOT have a 5200 bottom so what is an epoxy bottom?

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 7:06 pm
by mfine
The survey says the bottom is original with 5200. That means it is a 55 year old bottom with some touch up caulking. It is not a new bottom of any kind.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 7:49 pm
by tom king
If for any reason you feel uncomfortable with this boat then move on. There are some very reputable restorers and classic boat resellers. And, there are alot of boats on the market. Do LOTS of homework. Ask LOTS of questions. Go to some ACBS shows.

Bottom line, get yourself really smart before you make an investment.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 8:17 pm
by Mark Christensen
Even though it doesn't substitute for a survey, you should post some pictures. There are enough competent people here to give you a good opinion on what you're getting into. I don't like it when the experience become naysayers just because you're a little concerned. Don't give up on the boat yet, but seriously post some pics, and ask lots of questions. People here will be honest, maybe not gentle, but honest, and try and help you out as much as possible.

Mark

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 8:26 pm
by kleiner
As I read it, I wonder if it does perhaps have a 5200 bottom, but the surveyor wrote kind of a funny description.

"Bottom condition is original with seams caulked with 5200 adhesive sealant. Inner-ply is of plywood rather than diagonal inner planking, no evidence of rot or decay noted."

Note that it says "bottom condition is original" (whatever that means - like original condition from the factory? or original condition for a 55 year old boat?), not "original bottom". In fact, it does not sound like an original bottom when the surveyor goes on to state that the inner layer is plywood and not diagonal planking. The only way to do this would be to remove all bottom planks to replace the inner layer with plywood, and then reinstall original (dumb) or new planks (presumably using 5200).

I would inquire of the restoration shop. Perhaps it is a 5200 bottom and they have some documentation photos.

- Kevin

Bottom

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 8:40 pm
by gbraker
I kind of thought the same thing. It says 5200 bottom, but also plywood not planks. If someone replaced the inner planks with plywood, then they would probably put a 5200 bottom on it. Why else would you put the plywood in there.

I have a feeling it has a 5200 no soak bottom.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 8:56 pm
by Bill Basler
Donald, your approach is perfect. Now is the perfect time to ask the questions.

Matt Fine (mfine) recently spent some time discussing a variation of what you are hearing here...specifically, "when does chasing an ideal scenario stand in the way of going boating." Everyone here is coming at your question from a different angle. And strangely they're ALL right.

Bret Kiddey (Wood Commander) states something that we all believe in. Fact is most all of these old boats have met hit their limit as far an original bottom is concerned. There are exceptions, but realistically, they all need to have their bottoms redone properly. It is not only the ideal solution—sometimes it is the only safe solution. Every boat is different. Some are still serviceable with their original bottoms. Others are flat out unsafe. It is a plus that the boat has been surveyed.

I think most everyone, including Matt Fine would agree that a new bottom job is the ideal way to virtually eliminate problems. But, it may or may not be economically feasible.

It sounds like the boat you are looking at does not have a true, newer technology 5200 bottom. No need to rehash what this is here, If you use the search above to search for 5200, you will find many prior discussions. In short though, a real, died-in-the-wool 5200 bottom is very much different than caulking the planks with 5200.

The boat you are looking at is a U-22 Sportsman. This is a great pick—among the most practical of all old Chris-Craft. Your really can't go wrong with a U-22. The only downside is that there are so many of them around.

BUT

As Tom King suggests the high number of U-22s can also be a plus. If you truly have the wooden boat bug, and it sounds like you do, then you're in good company here. I would recommend that you cast your net as wide as possible. There are many, many U-22s out there, and some are excellent deals.

In my opinion, the biggest negative to the boat that you are looking at is that someone went about things in reverse order. They addressed the topsides, the gloss, the pretty wood that everyone sees, the floor, etc, but they may have skimped on the bottom. I say "may have" because we do not really know. It sounds like the bottom, using the surveyors own words, is an original bottom that has been caulked.

Will this work? Yes, for awhile. Is it safe? It's hard to tell. More than likely you'd get some use out of it before you have to bite the bullet and rebottom. But, eventually you will come back to that bottom.

Someone took care of the "house's" siding. The paint. The trim. The windows, The roof. But they may have ignored that the house was sitting on a foundation that was cracked, and starting to cave in. Now all the one that has been invested in making the "house look great, may be at jeopardy in order to lift the house up and fix the foundation.

Compare, compare, compare!

Finally, it took me several years to understand that I wasn't buying the last barrelback. Or the last Gar Wood. Or the last 20-foot Custom. Or the last U-22 for that matter. In most cases there will be another option tomorrow. Or a few years from tomorrow.

I/we want you in the hobby. It is every bit as "cool" as you think it might be. But we don't want you to stick a toe in, then get really disappointed one or two years from now.

The bottom is the single biggest expense on any of these boats. You have to consider it carefully.

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 9:02 pm
by Bill Basler
Playing devil's advocate here, wouldn't a 1956 boat have a factory original inner bottom of plywood? I agree with you all who think this could be a matter of the surveyor's semantics. But, it is so hard to tell from this computer. I don't necessarily think that the word plywood is an indicator.

Donald, what may help is if you could get at lest one close up photo of the transom of the boat, down low where you can see the end planks. If this is an original bottom that has been caulked you would expect to see some plank cupping here. If the planks are truly bedded in 5200 we might be able to tell that as well.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 12:57 am
by Reginald Down
Donald,

Welcome to the Chris-Craft Antique Boat Club and the Boat Buzz Forum.

You are in good company here. You have come to the right place and are asking the right questions. Collectively, the folks here on this site have an incredible amount of unbiased knowledge on every aspect of the boat you are considering. Most of the guys here have seen the movie "The Good, The Bad & The Ugly" many times and will point you in the right direction.

Make your decision based on knowledge, not just an emotional decision, and like they say - take your time, ask lots of questions and do your research. Decisions you make now, will have a direct impact on your future enjoyment in the antique & classic boat hobby. That - I know from experience...

ok then, here are some pics

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 1:26 am
by dpw1959
I have a shot of the entire transom but will give you the zoom in shot first since my other pic has the boat name on it and as I said before, I don't want to throw anybody under the bus due to my ignorance. Thank you all for your help. The boat price seems to be resonable providing the bottom is fairly sound. I don't have the money to invest in a new bottom immediately and would like to enjoy a couple seasons with the boat before I get a new bottom or "it sinks!"
Image

Image

Image

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 6:30 am
by Bill Basler
Donald, it looks as through the boat likely has its original bottom (90% sure on this, based on the photos). Using the surveyor's words, "caulked with 5200" it appears to be just that. From the bow photo, it appears that the seams have been Vee grooved a bit, then filled with caulk.

This probably tells me the boat was leaking a little or a lot. (they all do), and the owner decided this was the quickest, most in inexpensive way to slow the water leaks down.

The ideal bottom repair is the $15,000 way. The "caulk it" method is not ideal, but it may give you a few years of use. Some amount of water will continue to come in. If there is a little underlying rot there today, there will be more three years from now. This is not a huge issue, as any rot will be cured with a proper bottom job.

So, realistically, what you have today is a boat that should be fairly inexpensive. You will need to feel comfortable with the price you can acquire the boat, knowing you will need to be squirreling away money for a new bottom at some point. You also need to be comfortable with your safety and your passengers safety. This is a pretty serious matter.

How long since the boat has been in the water?

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 6:31 am
by Ken Miller
They quit making U-22s in '54, didn't they?

I will give you some advice along with photos of what the restorer found when he opened up the bottom on my '51 U-22. I bought the boat in 2002, at the time I could find no soft wood whatsoever on her. In fact, everything was incredibly hard. Even after using her for five consecutive subsequent summers, all wood was hard and I was in the mind set of defying anyone to find any rot in her. Pfft. :roll:

That was the problem. The wood was old and brittle. It may have not been mushy like a sponge, but it had lost its ability to swell and flex. Over the years it had been caulked between the planks to compensate for the wood no longer being able to swell as tightly as before.

The outer planks were removed and the inner canvas layer was rotten. My best advice to you would be to keep in mind you're going to need to put a new bottom on her at some point. Remember that Chris Craft intended for the bottoms on these boats to have a six year lifespan before replacement. Your boat, like mine, was pushing six DECADES.

This thread begs the need for a permanent article in this forum on the difference between original replacement bottoms, 5200 bottoms, and epoxy bottoms, as well enough information for the novice to decipher the difference between each of those and the bastardized versions in between.

Here's a few pics from my U-22:


Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Good Luck


Ken Miller

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 6:55 am
by Bill Basler
Ken, my error. I saw "Sportsman" and went right for U-22. This looks to be a 17'???

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 7:20 am
by mfine
Did I miss the part where it was a U-22? I just saw Sportsman. By the late 50's and into the 60's the inner layer of the bottom was plywood from the factory. I agree with Bill, I would be extremely surprised if that was a new 5200 bottom. If the planking is not original, it is still old, and not likely a CPES and 5200 system.

I would agree that the ideal solution is a full new bottom. That means all frames chimes etc. Many new bottoms just replace the frames that appear bad once the planking is off. Keeping in mind how much more it will cost to replace one more old fram later, when you do it, I would replace them all. That is also why I would be hesitant to buy a boat that advertises a new bottom without good documentation of what was done. It may have just been the planking.

The financial issues are tough. You have to decide what you can afford and what risks you can accept. All old boats carry some risk. Many older fiberglass boats have hidden cracks, rotten wood frames, missing or waterlogged foam and can be just as bad as an old woody. With any old boat, keep a life jacket handy and your insurance up to date and think about where and when you boat. Cold water and going far from shore concerns me the most. If my boat sinks 200 yards from shore in 80 degree water my biggest worry is my phone and wallet getting wet. 50 degree water and a mile off shore is a very bad situation I avoid.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 4:54 pm
by Al Benton
To the best of my knowledge, Chris-Craft didn't use plywood as the inner planking until 1959. There may have been some '58 models out there with plywood but if this is indeed a 1956 Sportsman, the original inner planking would have been solid mahogany laid diagonally.

If I'm correct on the inner planking, then the bottom planking must have been taken off, possibly quite some time ago and redone using plywood, possibly even an early, correctly done 5200 job.

Could this be a 1956, 20' Sportsman? Can Donald find a hull number and let us know so we can quit guessing (not that it's important but we're all curious).

Donald, do your research on this boat, talk to the shop that did work on it in '08. You may find that you have a real bargain here. Don't give up on this one until you know more about the boat.

Al

PS Oh, Matt. Standard safety equipment on these old boats now days is a 5 gallon Ace Hardware bucket. Just ask Phil!

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 pm
by mfine
The bucket serves to save the boat, for me safety is about the human occupants. Now, if my boat was as nice as Phil's, I would definitely carry a bucket. :D

It is a 17' boat.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 5:53 pm
by dpw1959
It is not a U-22 it is 17' long. In talking to the owner that had it BEFORE the current owner he said that the restoration shop caulked it since the bottom looked solid otherwise but had 1/16 inch gaps in between some of the planks so instead of putting on an entire new bottom they did that instead and he said he has never had any major leaking and that it would only take a few hours to swell and off you go.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 6:51 pm
by mfine
A 17 foot sportsman does not command such a high value that I would be inclined to put a $17,000 bottom on one unless it was a family heirloom. I would personally just use it until it sinks and then figure out a path forward when you reach that junction. That said, I am never more than 1200 feet from shore, I can swim, and I boat on a well populated lake. A worst case scenario of losing a few planks and having the boat drop out from under me would not be life threatening, and the more likely scenarios include getting to shore before it goes under and noticing a major issue before the water rushes in. You might have a decade or several before that happens, or maybe a week, just be prepared for it. If you are lucky, by time you need the new bottom, either resale values will have come up enough to justify it, or the boat will have become part of the family and you won't mind writing the check.

If you are not comfortable with the possibility of having to swim, I would look at a larger boat, and probably a newer glass or plastic hull with enough foam to meet current Coast Guard standards. Even with a brand new bottom, a boat like the 17 sportsman can get swamped by rogue waves/wakes and they won't float when full of water like a modern boat.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 8:06 pm
by dpw1959
Holy Mackeral! I certainly hope that is the glass half empty answer!
I think based on that comment I would continue to service the bottom as needed in the same fashion that seems to be working now until I can break even on a sale and trade up to a runabout with a 5200 bottom with additional cash.
The oldest owner who does not have a vested interest in telling me a story, as well as the restoration boatworks that worked on it both feel that the bottom is still solid and has a fair amount of life to it yet. So does that mean it is worth the gamble?????

Fear

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 8:38 pm
by gbraker
I can't believe the crap I'm hearing. I have a 24 ft Triple with the original bottom and it swells up and works great. As well does my 30 ft cruiser and my 16 ft double cockpit. I go anywhere and have had no problems. I have had leaks, but no big deal. You just have to pay attention. Anyone can hit something out there, and have a problem, but if you have a cell phone & a VHF you can get help. Even a brand new boat can sink under certain circumstances.

Lets face it, you can have problems with anything you own, but you can't be terrified of what could happen. You just have to be prepared.

Rogue waves

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 8:43 pm
by gbraker
Give me a break!! We aren't crossing oceans, for Gods sake we boat in lakes and rivers.

Jesus! Rogue waves!!

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 9:25 pm
by mfine
I have seen 3 boats get swamped by waves and I have not hit 40 yet. 17 foot boat, one too many people on board, converging wakes from 4th of July traffic, it happens. I would guess a lot more than wood boats going under because they did not get a new 5200 bottom right away.

My point is, if you are paranoid about the condition of the bottom, you should think about what kind of boat if any is right for you. If you are prepared to get wet and maybe swim, the old bottom does not need to scare you away.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 9:39 pm
by mfine
dpw1959 wrote: The oldest owner who does not have a vested interest in telling me a story, as well as the restoration boatworks that worked on it both feel that the bottom is still solid and has a fair amount of life to it yet. So does that mean it is worth the gamble?????
That depends on the price they are asking and how it compares to other boats on the market with and without new bottoms.

At the right price, I am out boating with an original bottom that looks good to a surveyor. Other people think that is nuts. You have to decide for yourself.

Also, check the listings on various boat sites. I would not expect you will see too many 17 Sportsman with professionally done full replacement 5200 bottoms. Great if you can find one, but it may be something you have to do to your own boat when you are ready.

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 9:52 pm
by Reginald Down
Not sure if this is still for sale, the listing date was late 2010.

http://www.vintagemarine.com/sale.html