recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
rdunncpa@cpafla.com
cd 27 replacing standing rigging
Moderator: Jim Walsh
-
Warren Kaplan
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
Russell,russell wrote: recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
I can't help you with the quote for the work but I'm just curious. I own a 1980 CD27. Your rigger mentioned "undersized" rigging. Exactly what part of the standing rigging is considered undersized by him? When I had my boat surveyed last year the surveyor mentioned that the rigging was in good shape and never mentioned that anything was considered "undersized".
Warren Kaplan
S/V Sine Qua Non
CD27 #166 (1980)
Setsail728@aol.com
-
russell
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
he was referring to the guage of the shrouds. i don't have my notes here but the upper are going to be 1/4 " and the lower 3/16 so the current guages are thinner.
rdunncpa@cpafla.com
Warren Kaplan wrote:Russell,russell wrote: recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
I can't help you with the quote for the work but I'm just curious. I own a 1980 CD27. Your rigger mentioned "undersized" rigging. Exactly what part of the standing rigging is considered undersized by him? When I had my boat surveyed last year the surveyor mentioned that the rigging was in good shape and never mentioned that anything was considered "undersized".
Warren Kaplan
S/V Sine Qua Non
CD27 #166 (1980)
rdunncpa@cpafla.com
-
Don Carr
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
First, as in anything..get multiple quotes. Sounds quite high. Secondly, rigging is too important to trust to the uninitiated (read have a qualified rigger do the rigging). You can have your friend do the rebedding and wiring. Third unless the boat was re-rigged previously, the rigger is trying to sell what he has in inventory. I would submit that CD's are over-rigged for their size. Frankly by replacing rigging spec'd in the owners manual you would do well.
IMHO.
carrds@us.ibm.com
IMHO.
carrds@us.ibm.com
-
Clay Stalker
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
Russell-russell wrote: recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
Quality rigging materials can be pricey...make sure you use a qualified rigger with a good local reputation...labor seems quite high...standing rigging can be replaced in 12-16 hours I'm told. Don
't pay a rigger to rebed chainplates and other jobs that can be done by yourself or someone who charges lower rates than a rigger. Also, CD standard rigging was sufficient if not a bit oversized, so not sure why someone would tell you it's undersized unless it's not original or....well, you know. Best of luck...
Clay
cstalker@cheshire.net
-
Bill Goldsmith
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
Russell:
I would be EXTREMELY cautious about going up in standing rigging size. The CD manual specifies 5/32 for the lower shrouds and 7/32 for the uppers/forestay/backstay. Stick with those guages--Cape Dory did not undersize their specs for the rigging.
When tuning a sailboat, riggers start the process by tightening the turnbuckles so that the wire is 10% to 20% of the wire's breaking strength. The thicker the wire, the higher the breaking strength. The higher the breaking strength, the higher 10% to 20% of the breaking strength will be. If you go up in guage, you will likely be introducing stresses above that which the boat was designed for.
Also, with a deck stepped mast, rig tension above the designed specs may have a negative effect on the coach roof. For the 27, rather than a compression post, the downward rig weight and tension is transferred to the hull with an H-shaped beam that transfers the tension to the bulkheads and bulkhead posts. This is a nice setup as it avoids that post in the middle, but I would be careful about overstressing it.
Finally, as I understand tuning (and I am just learning about this), you should NOT under-tune a rig to adjust for having gone up in guage. This can result in loose shrouds and stays and can increase shock loads when tacking.
I understand Sta-Loks are great and the conduit sounds like a good idea as well.
If it were me I would opt for the knowledgable friend (especially the "friends" on this board.
Good luck,
Bill Goldsmith
CD27 #173
Second Chance
goldy@bestweb.net
I would be EXTREMELY cautious about going up in standing rigging size. The CD manual specifies 5/32 for the lower shrouds and 7/32 for the uppers/forestay/backstay. Stick with those guages--Cape Dory did not undersize their specs for the rigging.
When tuning a sailboat, riggers start the process by tightening the turnbuckles so that the wire is 10% to 20% of the wire's breaking strength. The thicker the wire, the higher the breaking strength. The higher the breaking strength, the higher 10% to 20% of the breaking strength will be. If you go up in guage, you will likely be introducing stresses above that which the boat was designed for.
Also, with a deck stepped mast, rig tension above the designed specs may have a negative effect on the coach roof. For the 27, rather than a compression post, the downward rig weight and tension is transferred to the hull with an H-shaped beam that transfers the tension to the bulkheads and bulkhead posts. This is a nice setup as it avoids that post in the middle, but I would be careful about overstressing it.
Finally, as I understand tuning (and I am just learning about this), you should NOT under-tune a rig to adjust for having gone up in guage. This can result in loose shrouds and stays and can increase shock loads when tacking.
I understand Sta-Loks are great and the conduit sounds like a good idea as well.
If it were me I would opt for the knowledgable friend (especially the "friends" on this board.
Good luck,
Bill Goldsmith
CD27 #173
Second Chance
russell wrote: recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
goldy@bestweb.net
-
Bill
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
Russell:
As a follow-up to my prior posting, here is a breaking strength chart (this one was on sailnet at http://www.sailnet.com/store/buying_gui ... de_id=1002
Sorry the chart is so jumbled--the link above will be easier to read.
Type 304 (1/19 Stainless) Type 304 (7/19 Stainless)Type 316 (1/19 Stainless)
Wire Size Breaking Strength (lbs.)
3/32" 1,150 920 1,150
5/32" 3,300 2,400 3,000
3/16" 4,700 3,700 4,400
7/32" 6,300 5,600
1/ 4" 8,200 6,400 7,300
9/32" 10,300 9,400
5/16" 12,500 9,000 10,600
3/8" 17,600 12,000 16,000
7/16" 23,400 21,500
1/ 2" 29,700 27,500
9/16" 37,000 33,000
Note the large percentage differences between breaking strengths.
On 1x19 5/32 the breaking strength is 3300 for 304 and 3000 for 316; for 3/16 it is 4700 and 4400 respectively. At 10%, using 5/32" 304, you'll have a load of 330 pounds, while using 3/16" 304 you'll have a load of 470 pounds, or 42% too tight. All for only going up 1/32!
On the uppers, 1 x 19 7/32 breaking strength is is 6300 while 1 x 19 1/4" wire breaking strength is 8200!! Doing the same math, the uppers would be about 30% too tight.
Good luck,
Bill Goldsmith
goldy@bestweb.net
As a follow-up to my prior posting, here is a breaking strength chart (this one was on sailnet at http://www.sailnet.com/store/buying_gui ... de_id=1002
Sorry the chart is so jumbled--the link above will be easier to read.
Type 304 (1/19 Stainless) Type 304 (7/19 Stainless)Type 316 (1/19 Stainless)
Wire Size Breaking Strength (lbs.)
3/32" 1,150 920 1,150
5/32" 3,300 2,400 3,000
3/16" 4,700 3,700 4,400
7/32" 6,300 5,600
1/ 4" 8,200 6,400 7,300
9/32" 10,300 9,400
5/16" 12,500 9,000 10,600
3/8" 17,600 12,000 16,000
7/16" 23,400 21,500
1/ 2" 29,700 27,500
9/16" 37,000 33,000
Note the large percentage differences between breaking strengths.
On 1x19 5/32 the breaking strength is 3300 for 304 and 3000 for 316; for 3/16 it is 4700 and 4400 respectively. At 10%, using 5/32" 304, you'll have a load of 330 pounds, while using 3/16" 304 you'll have a load of 470 pounds, or 42% too tight. All for only going up 1/32!
On the uppers, 1 x 19 7/32 breaking strength is is 6300 while 1 x 19 1/4" wire breaking strength is 8200!! Doing the same math, the uppers would be about 30% too tight.
Good luck,
Bill Goldsmith
Bill Goldsmith wrote: Russell:
I would be EXTREMELY cautious about going up in standing rigging size. The CD manual specifies 5/32 for the lower shrouds and 7/32 for the uppers/forestay/backstay. Stick with those guages--Cape Dory did not undersize their specs for the rigging.
When tuning a sailboat, riggers start the process by tightening the turnbuckles so that the wire is 10% to 20% of the wire's breaking strength. The thicker the wire, the higher the breaking strength. The higher the breaking strength, the higher 10% to 20% of the breaking strength will be. If you go up in guage, you will likely be introducing stresses above that which the boat was designed for.
Also, with a deck stepped mast, rig tension above the designed specs may have a negative effect on the coach roof. For the 27, rather than a compression post, the downward rig weight and tension is transferred to the hull with an H-shaped beam that transfers the tension to the bulkheads and bulkhead posts. This is a nice setup as it avoids that post in the middle, but I would be careful about overstressing it.
Finally, as I understand tuning (and I am just learning about this), you should NOT under-tune a rig to adjust for having gone up in guage. This can result in loose shrouds and stays and can increase shock loads when tacking.
I understand Sta-Loks are great and the conduit sounds like a good idea as well.
If it were me I would opt for the knowledgable friend (especially the "friends" on this board.
Good luck,
Bill Goldsmith
CD27 #173
Second Chance
russell wrote: recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
goldy@bestweb.net
-
M. R. Bober
Under sized rigging, my foot!!
I would have to agree with the other posts. There is/was nothing "under" on the CD27. If the rig is original, your rigger is ....
Seriously, in the 17 years we had TIA MARI (CD27) no surveyor (or yardman) EVER expressed the opinion that she was anything but OVER built and rigged.
Get a second opinion, but be careful about learning how to rig on your own CD.
Best wishes,
Mitchell Bober
RESPITE
CD330
Seriously, in the 17 years we had TIA MARI (CD27) no surveyor (or yardman) EVER expressed the opinion that she was anything but OVER built and rigged.
Get a second opinion, but be careful about learning how to rig on your own CD.
Best wishes,
Mitchell Bober
RESPITE
CD330
-
Will
Re: cd 27 replacing standing rigging
Here is a thought. You and your friend do everything except the fine tuning. Will
willwheatley@starpower.net
russell wrote: recently had a rigger quote approx 3m to replace and upgrade to proper spec standing rigging, fix mast lights, run conduit in mast, rebed chainplates etc. stalock fittings and other materials approx 1600 and labor 1200. doesn't include marina fee and crane. vessel is 20 yrs old and the undersized deteriorated rigging seems original.
vs doing it with an experienced friend who claims knowledge has offerred to help.
comments are appreciated.
willwheatley@starpower.net