# unidentified yacht



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

hello , i brought a yacht , to completeyl revamp how can i find out about it. i think its an ohlson 38


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

hello , i brought a yacht , to completeyl revamp how can i find out about it. i think its an ohlson 38


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

To my eye, it does not look like an Ohlson 38. The Ohlson 38 does not have the stepped coachroof that this boat has. My guess is this is an older design, possibly from the '60s or early '70s, when stepped coachroofs were in vogue.

Doesn't it have a hull identification number?


----------



## svHyLyte (Nov 13, 2008)

If there is a HIN number on the upper starboard corner of the transom you can look up the coding on the BoatUS web site. The HIN will tell you the builder and the year of manufacture. Otherwise, as Caleb noted, a photo might help, eh?


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

JohnRPollard said:


> To my eye, it does not look like an Ohlson 38. The Ohlson 38 does not have the stepped coachroof that this boat has. My guess is this is an older design, possibly from the '60s or early '70s, when stepped coachroofs were in vogue.
> 
> Doesn't it have a hull identification number?


no hull no found, its a plug aS WELL as all the timbers are left in it. conc.rete keel


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

CalebD said:


> Ummm, pictures would help.


hers some photos will get more


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

waynecollett said:


> no hull no found, its a plug aS WELL as all the timbers are left in it. conc.rete keel


If it's a plug, then there's the possibility it has a one-off deck too. The hull does resemble the Ohlson 38. Can you get a photo of the stern/transom and skeg?

P.S. I merged the two threads that were running concurrently.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

That does not look like a plug in that it has wide planking and punched web frames instead of bulkheads. Plugs rarely can be converted into actual boats since plugs lack the proper structural design to be a boat. My best guess is that this is a wooden boat that someone glassed over. Between the punched web frames and the concrete ballast, that's a pretty scary object passing as a boat! 

Jeff


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

JohnRPollard said:


> If it's a plug, then there's the possibility it has a one-off deck too. The hull does resemble the Ohlson 38. Can you get a photo of the stern/transom and skeg?
> 
> P.S. I merged the two threads that were running concurrently.


ill get more photos later


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

give me your email , i can send photo easier than trying to load them on here.


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> That does not look like a plug in that it has wide planking and punched web frames instead of bulkheads. Plugs rare can be converted into actual boats since plugs lack the proper structural design to be a boat. My best guess is that this is a wooden boat that someone glassed over. Between the punched web frames and the concrete ballast, that's a pretty scary object passing as a boat!
> 
> Jeff


the fibre glass is nearly two inches thick. it weighs 5 tons


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

If the fiberglass truly, really accurately is 2" thick, then whoever built it, knew nothing about fiberglass design for a boat of that size and type. 

2" thick fiberglass is so extremely thick and overweight for a 38 footer particularly when you say that the whole boat weights only 5 tons, especially with that hull form, and especially when combined with your earlier assertion that the boat has the concrete ballast, that if true I need to double up on my original comment; that is a terrifying object attempting to masquerade as a sailboat. 

Either that or perhaps you are mistaken. When you think about a 5 ton, 38 footer, the hull (except at the keel) is usually in a range around 1/2" to maybe 3/4" of fiberglass thickness. As the thickness of the fiberglass in the hull gets thicker than that, it means that there is less weight available for proper ballasting and for a proper internal structure, let alone interior furnishings, tankage and the gear that is needed on a boat. And since concrete is a very low density ballast, you would need a whole lot more ballast or place it a whole lot deeper than say a boat that had lead ballast, and the keel cavity on the boat in question is pretty short in length and draft that means that the concrete is not especially deep in the water either. 

So if your numbers and materials are right (5 tons, 38 feet, concrete and 2" thick hull) then I would seriously recommend parting that mess out and looking for something safe to sail. But if as it appears, you are dealing with an older wooden race boat that someone has glassed over. That would be good news compared to either the assumption that someone has tried to turn a plug into a sailboat, or that the boat has a 2" glass hull. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

waynecollett said:


> give me your email , i can send photo easier than trying to load them on here.


Best to load them here, where more eyes will see them and increase your chances of a correct i.d.


----------



## waynecollett (Aug 15, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> If the fiberglass truly, really accurately is 2" thick, then whoever built it, knew nothing about fiberglass design for a boat of that size and type.
> 
> 2" thick fiberglass is so extremely thick and overweight for a 38 footer particularly when you say that the whole boat weights only 5 tons, especially with that hull form, and especially when combined with your earlier assertion that the boat has the concrete ballast, that if true I need to double up on my original comment; that is a terrifying object attempting to masquerade as a sailboat.
> 
> ...


just got hold of the seller, whos said hes had a survey done, sending it to me asap. 
its 2inhes thick where the deck is joined to the hull, bit of a state as im cutting it about to insert reinforcements for the stanchions pulpits etc, took a skin fitting out and the fibreglass is about 12 to 15 mm thick. thinking about ripping all the wood out and putting in new bearers all round , or leave the wood in and fibre glass it all in, the only rot ive found is where the deck leaked ontop of the timbers inside. seeing as its a shell ive got all the options open to me . ive got loads and loads of epoxy glues , fibreglass, resins etc , i got all the time in the world as well. im loving it. except for when it rains that is.
by the way this boat came with a 50ft mast and a smaller mizzen mast. so it was set up as a ketch. all the rigging is good condition. now all i need is a pot of money and a sense of humour. might be ready for next year.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

waynecollett said:


> ... now all i need is a pot of money and a sense of humour. might be ready for next year.


I don't mean to rain on your parade. Just trying to caution you about the costs and time involved in such an undertaking. You could easily expend far more money on this project, than it would take to purchase a respected design that is ready to sail today.

And that ready-to-sail boat would likely have more residual resale value than this one, which has uncertain pedigree and will amount to a "one-off" even if fitted out more-or-less correctly.

You are about to get involved in a MAJOR undertaking. You have to like working on boats more than sailing them to get involved in a project like this. And whatever you do, don't undertake this project thinking you will get your money back when it's done. That possibility is remote at best.

Nevertheless, best of luck!


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

*Appears to be a Hughes 38*

The photos appear to be of a deck from Hughes 38 (AKA Hughes Northstar 38) or a similar S&S design. These were built in Canada in the 1970's. The interior clearly appears to be a wooden hull with race boat framing from the late 1960's or early 1970's. If I remember correctly this appears to be a very similar design to P.M. Edward Heath's _Morning Cloud 1._ The perferated frames was sometimes used as a weight savings move in that era when wooden boats were still seen as being potentially lighter, and stiffer stiffer and also stronger than similar weight glass boats.

I do not believe that the Hughes 38 or any of the S&S 38's were available as a yawl. Given the lines of the boat, and if she was every actually rigged with two spars, then more than likely the intent was to rig the boat as a yawl and not a ketch.



















When you talk about restoring an old boat of this era, it is not something that should be done lightly. Adding or subtracting weight will impact how the boat will actually float, and how much stability it will have. When it comes to structure and hull thicknesses, you want just enough to make the boat strong enough that you can sail the boat reliably. Randomly adding structure can only negatively impact the boat's sailing characteristics, carrying capacity, and safety.

My point here is this, if you were an experienced boatwright, and if you had access to a good yacht designer, restoring a boat like this can be done and end up with an okay (or slightly better) boat. It would mean rigorous reverse engineering of what you have and then careful design to produce what you want when you are done.

But you show not even the slightest sign of being experienced, or rigorous in your approach. Your basic descriptions of what you have show a general lack of knowledge of what you have bought and the process required to get to a finished boat. Its not for me to say this since you probably know this already, but sometimes it is helpful to see this in black and white, you basically have three choices here: 1) Stop for a moment and do some careful homework. Learn about the boat you bought in real detail and develop an engineered plan for your work before you do any more harm to the old girl, 2) Roll the dice and hope for the best. Having designed a few boats in my day and read your post, I respectfully suggest that given your approach and knowledge level, the dice are loaded against you at this point, or 3) Realize that rebuilding a derilict is not for everyone and that buying this old hull was probably a mistake that can be reversed by getting rid of these parts of a boat one way or another, and while that may prove expensive, it would not be as expensive as blundering ahead.

And if you are considering continuing with plan 1 or 2 you need to bear in mind that a hull, old engine and some rigging represents perhaps 20% of the overall costs to rebuild a boat. The material and labor to properly rebuild and upgrade an old boat of this size to a yacht level of finish can easy run $80- 100,000, of which the labor is about half.

And if all is done with a high level of skill and attention, and the boat was in perfect shape, if it has a really clever layout and perfect finsihes, and a like new engine, and great sails, and good deck hardware and reasonable electronics, given the limitations of the dated hull design, it might be viewed be a moderately nice one-off with a value somewhere in the $20-30K range. Those are huge "if's".

As John points out, you can buy similar boats ready to go for far less, get out there sailing sooner, and have something which would be easier to sell when you are done with her.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------

