# Sailboat Quality



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

I am relatively new to sailing, and have a burning question.....

I am going to be in the used boat market for a while. I realize that there are MANY variables, the care of owners, the after market equipment... but.....

When all these things are considered, on average......

_In terms of initial build quality and long term reliability, what are the various brands of boat ranked from highest quality to lowest?_

I also have heard that certain decades of certain builders varied over time, denote as needed!


----------



## WDS123 (Apr 2, 2011)

I got my popcorn and drinks ready - this will be fun !


----------



## Skipper Jer (Aug 26, 2008)

Maybe you could narrow it down a bit, length, cruiser, racer, trailer sailor, three mast schooner, budget, intended use.


----------



## bigdogandy (Jun 21, 2008)

My list has Endeavour at the top, followed closely by Hinckley and Swan......


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

This is a good question and has been asked and answered many times in the past. A rehash it always good though.
Your question is probably not the real question however. The real question is probably more like "How do I go about picking a boat for me?" The underlying assumption is that while you are looking you might as well look at boats with known good quality. Which is logical but misses a lot of reality.
Most of us when looking at boats for the first time use our experience in shopping for cars as a rough guide. This does not however work out as well as one would expect.

One reason the car analogy does not work with boats is because the boats you will most likely be looking at will be from 10 to 30 years old. 
Boats are much more complicated than cars having multiple electrical and water and power systems.
Boats are much more likely to be modified, sometimes for the better sometimes for the worst.

A simplistic answer to your question is to check the list price of the boats. One would think that if the vendor was able to get 100,000 or more for the same length boat it would be a better boat. 
True but not the whole story. Someone like Catalina or Benateau that takes only days to build a boat has much less labor costs than a builder that takes months to build a boat. The production boat is much better built than the numbers would indicate because the cost of molds and factory setup is spread over so many units.

So to answer your real question you have to decide on:
1. Where you are going to sail it and how often.
2. How many people and for how long at a time (day, weekend, weeks, months)
3. Your budget.
4. Your experience
5. Are you a do-it yourselfer with skills and tools if not are you willing to learn and buy the tools
6. If you have specific goals what are they?
7. How much time will you have?

With these answers we can discuss specific boats and their merits.

To give you a specific example if you were to see a Catalina 25 for $4,000 in impeccable condition and a beat up Swan 42 with a blown motor for 200,000 the Swan is the better pedigree boat. 
Which boat if either is the boat for you however depends on the answer to the above questions.

For a simple market value ranking just check prices on yachtworld.


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

davidpm said:


> The real question is probably more like "How do I go about picking a boat for me?"


Well..... for me, it's actually closer to the real question for a couple of reasons....

I sail in fresh water great lakes, so the punishment of the salt sea is not an issue. The #1 reason of a used boats condition seems to be original build quality. You can really see it looking at a ODay, compared to say, a Pearson.

I realize that previous owner care counts for alot. But, in big freshwater lakes, no-one is going crazy outfitting their boat with lots of stuff to go long distance cruising. Most boats are pretty minimal for equipment and this is less of a factor in used boat cost.

This comes down to there being a host of used boats in the 1970-1990 range all around 27-36 feet long (most have stayed in the lakes their whole lives). The three factors that seem to determine the used price are (in no particular order)

1. Age
2. Length
3. Original build quality

There seems to be consistency in #3. You walk in some brands and its all wood finish, and the build quality is obvious. Others, not so much. I'll make the intellectual leap that the quality in those certain brands extends from what I can see to what I can't.

To take a more mundane example:

Walmart
JC Penny
Target
EMS

I bet you can tell which end is the better quality


----------



## Landgull (Dec 30, 2011)

The best boat is the one you own that gets you on the water sailing.


----------



## SHNOOL (Jun 7, 2007)

I have a Capri 25, that many say is a terrible quality boat (I can see why they might say it mind you, but I dunno any of them are unique to that boat alone)... but, keep in mind, the boat is 30 years old. At 30, I think it's holding up pretty well.

I'll give a +1 to Landgull, get sailing, worry about quality later. Any boat can do well, if it's maintained well.


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

I should add that I am on my 3rd boat... and starting to become more sensitive to the question of quality.

When you are buying 20-30 year old boats, whether the manufacturer spent that extra time and effort to make those chinplates bulletproof starts becoming important


----------



## SeaQuinn (Jul 31, 2012)

Probably the better question is "what is the best quality boat at a certain size and age at a particular price". Even there you will get tremendous variation based on the care and maintenance that the boat has had. 

We recently bought a boat and looked at all of these things, and especially resale value. If a boat that is a certain age is still selling at or above it's original sales price (on average) you may be looking at a good value. 

Take your time and look at boats in your price range....ask other boat owners, research boat listings and go to owners websites to find out how the actual owners feel about their boats. You will hear much variety but you will find people who upgrade to the same brand....time after time. That says a lot.

Because boats are so different....for different needs....you can't easily list them like cars, as another poster said. Think of them more like Horses. 

If you need one for trail riding and you are looking at race horses....no mater how much of a value he is and how much you pay for him, you won't be very happy when you try him out on the trail. Also even a free horse costs the same to feed and stable as most of the others. You will spend less if you are willing to put in more work, but it will be a while before you are riding comfortably. And most important ....getting rid of a bad one is tough....everyone will be looking him in the mouth!


----------



## scratchee (Mar 2, 2012)

I can't answer your question but I would like to support the validity of such a question. It's true that there are numerous, maybe countless, factors that go into selecting the "right" boat for your needs. But one of those factors is build quality, and you have chosen to ask that specific question here. I hope you get the answers you seek.


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

Hrmmmmm

I am surprised that people are not being more definitive. Yes, I realize that aftermarket stuff, maintenance all go into the price.

But when we walk on a 1985 C&C or Ericson, even my wife can see they were built to higher quality standards than a Hunter or MacGregor!


----------



## Flybyknight (Nov 5, 2005)

Look at Cape Dory, and a terrific web site for Cape Dory owners:
The Cape Dory Board • Index page


----------



## SeaQuinn (Jul 31, 2012)

You may also want to consider Valient, S-2, Caliber, Sabre and Island Packet.


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

Swann, Hinkley = Rolls Royce
Chance, CS (Canadian Seacraft?), PS (Pacific Sailcraft?) = Jaguar
early Tartan, Cal, Cape Dory, "J" boats, Allied and maybe Bristol = high end Cadillac of their times
--------------------
Beneteau = Lexus
Catalina = Toyota
Hunter = Honda
O'Day = GM

I left out a lot of brands, didn't I.

I don't think you will find 'bulletproof' chain plates in many of these mfr's older boats except perhaps Swan or Hinckley. Chain plates, no matter how well designed and implemented suffer from repetitive stress fatigue and need replacing before the rig comes down. 

Bulletproof and unsinkable are both unlikely adjectives to combine with the noun: "boat". Remember the 'Titanic'?

All boats (even new ones) need periodic maintenance. Older boats just need more.


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

Thanks Caleb!


----------



## Waltthesalt (Sep 22, 2009)

If you're into reading I recommend "Heart of Glass" by Daniel Spurr. It's the history of fiberglass boat manufacturers and gives insight into their boats and the their trade-offs in building them. I agree with what's been said about the "quality" of a boar being mostly about what your expectations are. The older the boat is the more how it's been maintained comes into play. From time to time Good Old Boat does comparison articles of older boats.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

vtsailguy said:


> I should add that I am on my 3rd boat... and starting to become more sensitive to the question of quality.
> 
> When you are buying 20-30 year old boats, whether the manufacturer spent that extra time and effort to make those chinplates bulletproof starts becoming important


Great Now we have something specific to argue about.

I would argue that in a lake with a 20+ year old boat the original build quality of the chain plates means less than nothing. Chain plates should be replace every 10 years, they are not a 30 year part.

I would rather have the o'day that had a full rig replace 5 years ago than a Pearson with a 30 year old rig.

Other than the fiberglass and the aluminum spars their is probably nothing on a boat that doesn't need if not replacement at least serious inspection and repair after 30 years.

A old boat is like George Washingtons ax. The head has been replaced 5 times the handle replaced 10 times but it's still GW's ax. What difference does the original quality make?

Don't forget I'm talking lake and coastal now. Off-shore other things start to matter like deck to hull connection, stringers, bulkhead tabbing, layup schedule and tankage. Things that make the boat more suitable for off-shore use and would typically be too expensive to refit although it has been done.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

vtsailguy said:


> Hrmmmmm
> 
> I am surprised that people are not being more definitive. Yes, I realize that aftermarket stuff, maintenance all go into the price.
> 
> But when we walk on a 1985 C&C or Ericson, even my wife can see they were built to higher quality standards than a Hunter or MacGregor!


That is exactly why I'm not being definitive although Caleb gave you a good run down.
The original build quality is obvious to anyone.

The risk is that you fall in love with the pretty C&C that is still pretty but someone sucked all the life out of and will be a money pit for you. You could have bought the not so pretty Hunter that is impeccably maintained you could sail for years with minimal trouble.

If you are already on your third boat you know this already though.
We buy with our heart and maintain with our wallet.

We all want a boat we can be proud of. It's a bonus if it floats however.


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

> I would argue that in a lake with a 20+ year old boat the original build quality of the chain plates means less than nothing. Chain plates should be replace every 10 years, they are not a 30 year part.


I disagree. On my boat the chainplates are built to last, and it is a good thing because it would be a major job! This is one example of the initial build quality of the boat. Some of the more lightly rigged boats out there may need to replace their chainplates, but on boats like mine they were done right on the initial build and 33 years later there is absolutely no concern about failure!


----------



## WDS123 (Apr 2, 2011)

What boats NEED to replace their chainplates every 10 years ? 

SchockT's experience with his Santana30 not having a hint of chainplate issues after 33 years seems to be the more typical situation. 


BTW - one of our Harbor daysailer owners also has a 50ft Swan circa 30 years old. His chainplates did need to be replaced due to corrosion.

The Schock Harbor 30 has a carbon fiber-epoxy-G10 stringer/ring frame that the SS-316 chainplates connect to. The thickened laminate extends 24" either side of the stringer to better distribute loads from keel-shrouds. It is a very very stiff system. The stringer and thickened laminate runs high enough up that the chainplates are never going to get wet. It turns out the Navy leadership 44s have a similar design approach.


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

Er... let's not get distracted on chainplates!

All things considered equal... initial build quality does make a difference. Some manufacturers overbuild, some cut corners to cut costs.


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

Yes, but the car analogy is a good one. There is no point in worrying about the Ferraris and the Rolls Royces if you are on a Ford budget! Best to zero in on boats in your price range and then examine the build quality differences between them. Sometimes it is not even the build quality that makes one better than the other but their choice of hardware and rigging.


----------



## LinekinBayCD (Oct 19, 2009)

SchockT said:


> I disagree. On my boat the chainplates are built to last, and it is a good thing because it would be a major job! This is one example of the initial build quality of the boat. Some of the more lightly rigged boats out there may need to replace their chainplates, but on boats like mine they were done right on the initial build and 33 years later there is absolutely no concern about failure!


I agree. When and if chain plates need to be replaced is a boat by boat decision.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

WDS123 said:


> What boats NEED to replace their chainplates every 10 years ?
> 
> SchockT's experience with his Santana30 not having a hint of chainplate issues after 33 years seems to be the more typical situation.


Santana 30/30 Email list archive: re: rig tuning

All parts on all boats are subject to damage and wear after years of service.
I didn't say that they needed to be replaced but that they needed to looked after and inspected. Even then they are suspect.
We just had a sailnet fellow dougsabagg that lost his gulfstar 50 due to chain plate failure. He had inspected only one side of the boat and they looked good.

Unless you pull them you will not see the damage as the damage is typically just below the deck.

My point is that original build quality can actually be counter productive. 
The Hunter may have had to be refit at 20 years because of lower quality parts so whey you buy it at 25 years you get a deal.
The premium boat may be all original at 30 years. Guess who gets to refit it?
Nothing lasts forever.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

vtsailguy-- I'm in your neck of the woods. I don't have an answer for your question, but when we were looking I had my budget and looked at just about every boat (at least the online listing) that fell within my budget parameters and size requirements. I didn't want to transport here, so that narrowed down my list to what was selling local. Typically, when I found a boat that would appeal to me, I'd then go online and research the heck out of it, learn what issues to look for, etc.

Ended up buying through Bruce Hill Yacht Sales and they made it a very smooth, easy transaction. We closed on August 4, launched the boat that same day, and have been sailing as much as possible since.


----------



## TQA (Apr 4, 2009)

I have not seen AMEL mentioned so far. IMHO one of the boats with the best build quality.

BUT if we are talking 20 year old boats I would rather sail a well maintained Morgan OI 41 than a neglected AMEL.


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

there are many great boats. how is the sailor who is going to be handling the boat??? is he or she as great as the boat??? 
folks can argue boat marques for hours if not days.
when you find the boat that is right for YOU, you will suffer the same lust you suffer in spouse hunting. but ye wont be able to survive without that boat..... then ye know is correct boat for you--even if everyone else in life poo poos your choice. is yours, not ours, and only you have to deal with the result of your searching.

both of my boats were built in 1970s--and each is great for the kind of boat each is. each has a different reason for being built. i am cruising a heavycruiser--i am selling a daysailing/weekender 35.


----------



## johnnyquest37 (Feb 16, 2012)

Lots of variables to consider as others have pointed out. Suggest you find a boat that you like/meets your needs. Then go to yachtworld.com and plug into the advanced search length, age, hull material, etc. of the boat you like. Sort that search result by price and you'll have idea of the market's idea of quality ranking for that particular year, anyway. One caveat to be careful of, though. Some boats are built much more heavily than others. For example, Island Packet purposely builds heavy boats. A similar sized Catalina, Beneteau, or Hunter will displace much less, and will be correspondingly less expensive to build. Pound for pound, the Island Packets will cost generally the same as light displacement boats of a similar size and similar production quality.


----------



## SlowButSteady (Feb 17, 2010)

WHEN the boat was made has a huge effect on quality. Early Catalinas (1970's - early 1980s) were definitely in the "Yugo" grade of quality compared to boats built in the last twenty years or so. Then again, that was more or less the standard of boar manufacturing of the era. Lots of from that time period, and before, were made using methods that would be deemed totally unacceptable today (e.g., gate valves on thru-hulls, mild steel used in structural supports, et cetera).


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

SlowButSteady said:


> (e.g., gate valves on thru-hulls, mild steel used in structural supports, et cetera).


I know about the gate valves and the plywood in the sump that causes the Catalina smile but where is the mild steel and which models?


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

SlowButSteady said:


> (e.g., gate valves on thru-hulls, mild steel used in structural supports, et cetera).


I know about the gate valves and the plywood in the sump that causes the Catalina smile but where is the mild steel and which models have it?


----------



## goosesgooses (Jul 28, 2011)

I have a 1986 Cal 22, when I bought the boat I knew little about what made a good or bad boat. Since I have been on many other boats that I do not consider as high quality as my Cal, those boast being Hunters, Catalina 22's, and Macgregors all around the same size.


----------



## NCC320 (Dec 23, 2008)

vtsailguy said:


> I should add that I am on my 3rd boat... and starting to become more sensitive to the question of quality.
> 
> When you are buying 20-30 year old boats, whether the manufacturer spent that extra time and effort to make those chinplates bulletproof starts becoming important


If you have already owned 3 boats, don't you kind of know already which boats are the best quality? It kind of looks like to me that this is another "lets beat up on MacGregor, Hunter, Beneteau, and Catalina" thread. If you want to push over trees, buy a Caterpillar, if you want to farm fields, buy Massy Ferguson or similar. That caterpillar is going to take a lot more abuse than the Massy Ferguson, but that doesn't make it a good match for typical farming. And buying a worn out caterpillar to get the rugged construction, and then using it for row farming is just making the situation worse.

I, for one, like those production brands that so many of you turn your noses up at. They give average people like me a reasonably good boat, completely suited for the way that average people are likely to use them. i.e., For the same money, I get a newer, larger, better equipped boat that will more than be a match for anything that I or mother nature will throw at it in the operating environment where I will be using it. My Catalina 320 that I bought new in 1999/2000 has done well, looks good in my eyes, and has never had serious maintenance problems. Of course, I could have bought a worn out caterpillar (I mean older quality boat) and knocked my self and my bank account out trying to keep it operating (oops...that is upgrading it) and still had something not worth very much, even through the brand is assumed to be better quality.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Over the years I have found that perceptions fuel a lot of the opinions on what "quality" is in boats. I recall back in the early 70's the Taiwan leaky teakies - Formosa, CT, Island Trader etc. 41's were seen as the epitome of quality, largely due to all the teak and bronze bits. At the same time Columbias were seen as inferior quality because they had so much plastic - liners etc.

40 years on those perceptions have been turned on their head - we all know the failings of the Taiwan boats of that era and most of the Columbias are still sailing with their original decks and masts.

Which is not to say that there aren't actual differences in build quality in boats - a Swan IS better built than a Hunter. For 3-4-5 times the price it BETTER be.

Value is an equally important attribute unless you have an unlimited budget or intend sailing in high latitudes or other demanding circumstances.


----------



## poopdeckpappy (Jul 25, 2006)

vtsailguy:914486 said:


> I should add that I am on my 3rd boat... and starting to become more sensitive to the question of quality.
> 
> When you are buying 20-30 year old boats, whether the manufacturer spent that extra time and effort to make those chinplates bulletproof starts becoming important


Chances are the manufacturer did not make anything bullet proof, that falls at the feet of a owner(s). Look at the joinery, look at the subframing that will indicate built quality.


----------



## cygtoad (Oct 10, 2011)

davidpm said:


> I know about the gate valves and the plywood in the sump that causes the Catalina smile but where is the mild steel and which models have it?


I am not sure about the Catalina's but a number of boats including the Endeavour 33 used unprotected mild steel in the mast step support. Without maintenance it rusted out badly and became a very expensive repair as all the head cabinetry usually needed to be removed to fix it.

I don't think they were the only company to do use steel in the mast step, but I doubt you will see that kind of construction on a more modern boat, an experiment of the time.

Oddly the Endeavour 33 used an entire grid of fiberglass encapsulated steel throughout the sole of the boat. On the one I saw there didn't seem to be any issues with delamination and the boat was almost thirty years old. Go figure.


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

caberg said:


> Ended up buying through Bruce Hill Yacht Sales and they made it a very smooth, easy transaction. We closed on August 4, launched the boat that same day, and have been sailing as much as possible since.


I got my first boat through BH

What you get and where are you moored?


----------



## vtsailguy (Aug 4, 2010)

NCC320 said:


> If you have already owned 3 boats, don't you kind of know already which boats are the best quality? It kind of looks like to me that this is another "lets beat up on MacGregor, Hunter, Beneteau, and Catalina" thread.


Its really not. I have a vague sense that for boats in 70's/80's that Cals and O'Days are good, hunters and caltalina's not so much. The others I have no clue.

When I buy a cordless screwdiver I know DeWalt will last and Craftsman will not take much use. For boats, I am still a novice.


----------



## capttb (Dec 13, 2003)

> When I buy a cordless screwdiver I know DeWalt will last and Craftsman will not take much use.


You should get a Craftsman from the 70's probably made from forged high carbon steel, bullet proof. Course it'll be twice as heavy as required, akward to handle and need to be rewired just like a boat from that era.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

vtsailguy said:


> Its really not. I have a vague sense that for boats in 70's/80's that Cals and O'Days are good, hunters and Catalina's not so much. The others I have no clue.


I seriously doubt if you will find any substantial difference in quality between O'day and Catalina that would make any difference 30 to 40 years after the fact.

They were both inshore price point boats. If anything the Catalina no matter how old still has support.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

capttb said:


> You should get a Craftsman from the 70's probably made from forged high carbon steel, bullet proof. Course it'll be twice as heavy as required, akward to handle and need to be rewired just like a boat from that era.


The first power tools I bought back in the 70's were Craftsman, based on their rep. They were in a class by themselves as the WORST power tools I ever owned. The 4X24 belt sander simply would not track the belt, the 3/8" drill burned out after being used all day, the router didn't even have a real collet - the end of the motor shaft was drilled to "replace" the inner portion of the collet.

They were junk then and seem to have been cheapened considerably since.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

davidpm said:


> I seriously doubt if you will find any substantial difference in quality between O'day and Catalina that would make any difference 30 to 40 years after the fact.
> 
> They were both inshore price point boats. If anything the Catalina no matter how old still has support.


I concur. Is a boat with teak faced plywood bulkheads higher quality than one with arborite faced plywood bulkheads? Not really - it may be a little more luxurious but luxury and quality are not the same thing.


----------



## rgscpat (Aug 1, 2010)

Uh, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but have we defined "Quality"?

It seems to me that manufacturers can choose to build to very different definitions of quality, depending upon the purpose of the boat. But quality may mean different things to different people. And quality may vary in different areas; while a top-end boat may generally have lots of quality design, construction, and finish across the board, it doesn't have to be that way. 

First, there can be differences in how well the boat is designed for its particular purpose. If someone tries to use the boat for some other purpose, its particular quality may not be evident. 

Then there's the quality, consistency, and carefulness of construction.

Then there are quality aspects such as durability and maintainability. 

Then there are issues of quality of design, construction, durability, maintainability, and other quality aspects for different subsystems, such as power plant, wiring, etc. There are specialized issues such as ergonomic comfort, especially in places like the helm station, and whether different sizes and heights of people can be comfortable, safe, and secure on the boat.

A boat could be built like a tank -- but it could sail like a fat pig. 
Or it could be splendidly built of the best materials on the planet -- but critical systems could be impossible to maintain or replace without tearing the boat apart. 
It could be a sexy looker and sweet sailor, but have an exhaust or electrical system that's just waiting to kill someone.
A boat could have gloriously beautiful design and magnificent finish and be a work of art --- and be a total failure at its mission or fall apart because of some stupid oversight in construction or design.

It's almost impossible, even when selling to high-budget customers for a manufacturer to get everything right --- and that's probably only possible when targeting the boat to a narrowly defined niche market and mission. I would venture that it's utterly impossible to achieve ultimate quality for every customer and mission profile for a boat. 

So, WHICH quality do you want with that burger?


----------



## NCC320 (Dec 23, 2008)

Actually, the Catalinas, O'Days, and most of the other boats built in the 70-80's were pretty darn good. All of this fussing about their poor quality is 40+ years after they were new. And, despite the Catalina smile due to a wood spacer deterioating, these boats, all of them, are still serviceable, despite the fact that most of them have been abused and ignored from a maintenance standpoint, and when they did get maintenance, it was usually by amateurs who, in most cases, didn't really know what they were doing. Actually, to a large degree, the people still messing with these boats are, for the most part amateurs, who freely subsititute cheap, non-marine components, and based on my observations in nearby marinas, do in general a poor job (and, I understand that many are trying to get into the sport on a limited budget, so it's ok...just be sure when you criticize the boat manufacturer for poor quality, it's something they did). 

Think about it. When these boats were 5, 10, 15 yrs. old, these quality issues were not present then ...no Catalina smile, no rotten bulkheads, or fallen liners, etc...., the boats were generally ok, and most of the issues have come about in later years. Now, a boat is a machine. Think about it, how many cars and trucks from the 1970's are running up and down the road today? Think about your house that was built in 1970. All of the appliances, furnaces, airconditioners, roofs, much of the wood, have been replaced. And your house has probably settled and there may be leaks and rotten wood from place to place. How many 1970 airliners are still in service, and would you want to ride on one? Think about the other hobby items...golf carts, motorcycles, campers, etc. from that time.....all gone to the junk yard. Farm tractors, construction equipment, desks, business machines....all gone to scrap. So maybe, just maybe, those old boats were not so bad after all. They're still hanging in there, ready to give you some fun, if you just stop trashing them and get about making repairs so you can go sailing.

And when you criticize the boat manufacturers on how they did things back then, keep in mind that, in boat building, as in everything else, techniques have been refined, there are new materials, and manufacturing methods are better today.

Further, I would suggest to you, that as one looks at older boats, you shouldn't focus on the brand so much. Select one that will fit your intended use...a boat that you think looks good (not what others necessarily think looks good or is proper), a coastal boat if you are going to be a coastal sailer, a blue water (old shoe, slug, but well built like a tank) if you are really going to attempt sailing off to the islands with $200 and a dream. When you pick the boat or boats that you like, then start looking at the quality angle. Because it's going to vary greatly from individual boat to boat within any brand due to the history and treatment that the particular boat has received, and that's likely to be more significant than brand to brand differences. 

If you wear Rolex watches, fine, go for the high price, high build quality boats. If you wear Timex or Casio, look lower on the scale. Both watches tell correct time, just as both types of boats will do anything that you are likely to do. (But beware of trying to operate on a Rolex level with a Timex budget.....a lesser brand boat in good condition that you can go sailing now is a better deal than a old, high end, but beat up boat requiring lots of maintenance before you can use it.


----------



## SlowButSteady (Feb 17, 2010)

davidpm said:


> I know about the gate valves and the plywood in the sump that causes the Catalina smile but where is the mild steel and which models have it?


Two examples off the top of my head are:
- Cal/Jensen boats (which were otherwise very well built) used a mild steel "beam" under the compression post in several models. 
- Many builders used (and still use?) galvanized mild steel keel bolts to secure iron keels. That was necessitated by galvanic considerations. However, some didn't bother with the galvanized bolts and just used untreated bolts/washers/nuts (my old Victory 21 had this problem).


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

As you focus more narrowly the 'quality' of the initial boat means less and less as the boat gets older. 
My 45 year old Tartan 27' was built like a Cadillac of it's day. 45 years later it is still a good boat but lots of things can (and do) go wrong in spite of good (or bad) design. Chain plates on most old boats are suspect no matter which 'brand'. Early designs for travelers were crappy to begin with and need updating as do many built in ice boxes. 
You are lucky if a boat with a 45 year old engine still works. Our Atomic 4 does. It just needs burping and TLC more often then not. 
For older boats the initial build quality matters so much less then the way a boat has been cared for and maintained.
It is kind of pointless to think that a twice holed and sunk Swann is worth more than a Catalina that has been really cared for. 
How hard a boat has been raced is another consideration. Boats that are raced hard or sailed hard have less life left in them then one that just puttered around the harbor. 
They all become VW Carmen Gia's after they have been water logged a few times. No Lexus can withstand the degradation of salt water for long, much less a Rolls Royce. 

If you want a well built newer boat then you will have to look at the Hunters, Beneteaus, Catalinas (HuntaBentaLinas) and see what you can afford (unless you can afford to spend more).


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

rgscpat said:


> *Uh, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but have we defined "Quality"?*
> 
> It seems to me that manufacturers can choose to build to very different definitions of quality, depending upon the purpose of the boat. But quality may mean different things to different people. And quality may vary in different areas; while a top-end boat may generally have lots of quality design, construction, and finish across the board, it doesn't have to be that way.
> 
> ...


I think that is the whole point of this thread.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I am going to offer there are two very different categories of quality. The first is the quality of the hull, rigging and mechanical systems. The second is of the fit and finish.  

Now, within each, there is quality for purpose. The quality of a coastal racer hull is going to be a different standard than for crossing an ocean.

Then of course, quality may not even be desirable, ironically. Bigger winches, stronger rigging, thicker teak decking and a more sturdy hull could make lake sailing a real drag.

In the end, most buyers are really looking for a hull that is best for their type of sailing and quality in fit and finish. Nothing wrong with that. JMHO


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

At the end of the day you will buy the boat that best suits you, your budget, and probably what will tip the balance, your heart.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

So here i sit on my 42 year old Cal 29 on which the refit issues were cause by compleat lack of care for 40 years 

We fixed the boat and use it HARD in saltwater and having owned and sailed on much more "modern" boats there is really not much differance in sailing performance IF you do and apple to apple compare 

IMHP none of the more costly boats work any better on a daysail/weekend basis they just cost a lot more money


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Minnewaska said:


> I am going to offer there are two very different categories of quality. The first is the quality of the hull, rigging and mechanical systems. The second is of the fit and finish.


Very true. We had a good example of that very thing in Canadian manufactured boats back in the golden age. C&C had a very high rep for quality of design and build and it was deserved. Hughes (NorthStar) had a somewhat lesser rep however their design quality (S&S) was at least as good as C&C. Also, S&S had a covenant with their designs that production builders had to meet certain build quality specs which were confirmed by visits from Rod Stephens hisself. To my mind there could hardly be a better guarantee of quality of construction.

However - the Hughes boats did not have the same "cosmetic" quality that C&C did - lots of laminate instead of wood, angled corners on bulkheads instead of rounded corners and so forth - areas where money could be saved without affecting the durability and seaworthiness of the boat, only the "perceived" quality.

There is an important distinction between substance and cosmetics and many people fail to understand or recognize it.


----------

