June 2005 - montgomery_boats - mailman.xmission.com

Wooden Plugs for Cockpit
by Dan Hall 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

What size wooden plugs are used to stop water entering the M-15 when under way. Took the M-15 #478 for my first sail on Big Bear Lake last weekend. Quite a bit of water accumulated on the cockpit sole, particularly when heeled over on either tack. Dan --------------------------------- Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football

1 0

FW: Cruiser challenge 2005 is one month away - please register today!
by bobjudy2＠comcast.net 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

---------------------- Forwarded Message: --------------------- From: bobjudy2(a)comcast.net To: montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmi.. Subject: FW: Cruiser challenge 2005 is one month away - please register today! Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:58:49 +0000 Hi, Gang, Those of you on the Left coast who are interested in a great weekend of sailing should check out the 2005 Cruiser Challenge in Monterey, CA. I have been to a couple of these and they are great fun; a low key race, dinner at the Monterey Yacht Club, and a chance to make new friends with a cordial group of sailors. This is a good chance for the novice as well as the more experienced skipper to sail Monterey Bay. Check it out!!! Bob 1982 M15 #208 SF Bay area

1 0

RE: M_Boats: old varnish / fiberglass
by Kovach, Jerry 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

There are several methods that I have successfully used. One is to simply use a razor blade and lift the old varnish off the gel coat. This generally works well on flat surfaces, not well at all if the varnish is on non-skid surfaces. A second method is to use a heat gun. One must be more careful, but this method is very quick, effective, and safe if used carefully. A third method I have used with excellent results is to apply a varnish remover to the dried varnish and remove with a scraper. A product called SOY.Gel has produced excellent results while at the same time being relatively safe to use and nondamaging to the gel coat. Jerry -----Original Message----- From: montgomery_boats-bounces+jerry.kovach=neustar.biz(a)mailman.xmission.com [mailto:montgomery_boats-bounces+jerry.kovach=neustar.biz@mailman.xmissi on.com]On Behalf Of Craig F. Honshell Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 5:03 AM To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats Subject: M_Boats: old varnish / fiberglass Anyone know a way to remove old, dried varnish from fiberglass w/out damaging the fiberglass? I know acetone would be good for freshly applied clean-up, but am thinking it would require something harsher to cut the old gunk. Thanks! _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats

2 1

Re: M_Boats: Penetrol
by Larry E Yake 20 Jun '05

20 Jun '05

I've been gone for a couple weeks, so missed this thread, but since my name came up, I thought I would give my somewhat modified opinion of Penatrol. I originally used the product when I started restoring Tullamore. She was badly oxidized, and my attempts at buffing were not very successful. I read about Penatrol on the Trailer Sailor site and gave it a try. It did give the hull a nice shine, but my prep work was not up to par and the yellow gel coat was blotchy underneath. I had 2 different professionals assure me they could buff it out and it would look great. Both were wrong. They were surprised they couldn't get the oxidation off. I began to suspect the Penatrol. After reading Scott Grometer's comments regarding the Flicka groups discussion, I'm convinced of it. This spring I wet sanded the hull to get down to good color. That did the trick, but I had to change sand paper very frequently as something was plugging it up. I had de-waxed the hull, so it must have been the Penatrol. I belive Penatrol would have been fine to use then once the hull was completely deoxidized, but I decided to try Poli-Glow. Got a great shine. The hull looks like new. I still belive Penatrol will give you a good shine, but do not apply it over oxidation, at least on colored fiberglass. The white topsides looked great with the Penatrol, but I suppose that's because the chalky oxidation was the same color and the Penatrol just made it shiny again. Larry On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:04:42 -0400 "Craig F. Honshell" <chonshell(a)ia4u.net> writes: > > It's the miracle restorer alright, Rik! I wonder if it works on the > scalp. :-) > Actually, you can thank Larry Yake, Tullamore's ( > http://www.funtigo.com/MSOG?b=197153&c=1789789&p=start ) caretaker. > I thought I > recalled some threads regarding "marine" Penetrol versus "hardware" > Penetrol, but > I've only used what I could find at hardware stores. When I finally > get the tarp off > my 17', I'm gonna buff out the hull with a good waxless rubbing > compound, then > Penetrol, then wax. My gelcoat is pretty tired and I doubt I'll get > a great result, > but I'll do what I can to get the best possible result. --Craig > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Rick Langer > To: montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com > Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 9:21 AM > Subject: Penetrol > > Hey Craig, > > I used hardware grade Penetrol, as you suggested. Thanks for > getting me > started with it. I just gave half of what's left to a friend who > was so > impressed with the results that he's going to use it on an old > Mercedes. > > This Penetrol is the Marvel Mystery Oil of fiberglass finishes. > > BTW, for all that have been following this hot story, after soaking > my > roto-till engine with MMO for three winters, it now runs very well. > I was > using MMO to free a frozen ring that I was guessing caused the low > compression. I didn't re-check the compression because the engine > runs > fine. > > Rick Langer > M15 #337 > > Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 20:25:28 -0400 > From: "Craig F. Honshell" <chonshell(a)ia4u.net> > Subject: M_Boats: Penetrol > To: "For and about Montgomery Sailboats" > <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Message-ID: <003701c567d2$c06c8e20$ce41b3cf@D89X0M51> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Did you use "marine" Penetrol, or just whatever you could find at > the > local Lowe's, > whatever? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Rick Langer > To: montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com > Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 10:03 AM > Subject: Penetrol > > This is an old thread, but I wanted to follow up on the advice I > was > given. > Yesterday I compounded my very oxidized blue hull. The results > were ok > but > not great. Then I put on a coat of Penetrol. The results are > spectacular. > Except for the dings and scratches the blue hull looks new. I > wasn't able > to wipe it off after application because it dried too quickly. > Next time > I'll do smaller areas at a time. The finish I got is high gloss. > > Thanks, > > Rick Langer > M15 #337 > Hudson River > _______________________________________________ > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > >

1 0

Re: M_Boats: Made it the rest of the way...
by chbenneck＠juno.com 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

Hi Bobbie, Great to hear that your trip was uneventful and that you got home safely. Now the real fun starts. Doing a dry run in your driveway, is a good idea, just be careful that there are no overhead power wires. That way you can see how it all fits together, and if there are questions, we can answer them for you. Connie

1 0

Re: Towing an M15 (yet another dissertation), and Cetol
by Wilsometer＠aol.com 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

Don, You might want to take a look at a piece I wrote that is now resident on the MSOG site. I cataloged my M15 gear and cumulative weight for a more realistic look at total trailering weight, and I express my opinions regarding appropriate tow vehicles there: http://msog.org/specs/boat_gear_weights.cfm Reading Rachel's account of extreme fishtailing reminded me of a similar incident (alas, I can't blame this on someone else, as I was at the wheel). While crossing the desert a couple of years ago, I braked hard and swerved to avoid an animal, and the M15/trailer went into violent fishtail mode--almost to the point of taking the truck with it. I managed to get it back under control, but I think a jackknife and/or roll was very narrowly escaped. In retrospect, I believe that my regular cab, short bed, 4x4 Ranger's short wheelbase and taller stance exacerbated the motion. My older long bed/2wd ranger with its longer wheelbase and lower stance was much more stable in similar such maneuvers, and I never experienced anything like the above--even with the same radial tires, which admittedly are somewhat more prone to sway. I mention this, as most of the small SUV variants out there are of higher stance and short wheelbase, and might behave in a similar manner during evasive/emergency maneuvers. I recently finished building a trailer for my Pacific Seacraft Flicka. The combined weight of boat (6000#), trailer (2100#), and gear (+/- 600#) is around the 8600# mark. I tow that with a new Ford Super-Duty/Super Cab. After hearing several horror stories of jackknifings, super heated brakes, etc., I decided to invest in a substantial braking system for the trailer. I now have huge Kodiak all-stainless caliper/vented cad-plated rotor disc brakes on all four wheels of the trailer. These are controlled by an 'Acti-Brake' electric-over-hydraulic controller (electrical signal from truck mounted accelerometer controls trailer mounted hydraulic pump/master cylinder). A breakaway cable will activate the pump should the trailer part company. In my case (with the Flicka), I was legally required to go with an electric or air activated system, as Canada prohibits surge activated trailer brakes above a certain weight (around 6000 lb.). There was, however, another compelling reason not to use surge brakes on this trailer. The problem with surge brakes is that they do not like long sustained downgrades. What happens is that as soon as you start downhill and the vehicle brakes are applied (or even compression braking of engine/downshifting), the weight of the trailer shifts forward and activates the surge activator's piston/master cylinder. At this point, the trailer brakes are essentially locked on, and the only way to disengage them is to accelerate the vehicle forward (which isn't going to happen going downhill). Invariably, the vehicle brakes are then released as the trailer brakes are engaged, and the trailer brakes are now doing most, if not all, the work for both vehicle and trailer. The net result is often superheating of the trailer brakes (usually accompanied by pronounced brake fade), and in worst case, damage to linings/pads/drums, or rotors. An electric/accelerometer controlled system allows an (adjustable) balancing of vehicle and trailer braking. Also, Disc trailer brakes require almost twice the hydraulic pressure as drums, and there are very few surge couplers (at present) that can produce enough pressure for panic stops. In addition, I am adding an adjustable tension sway-control system that should reduce fishtail potential. This is essentially a set of brake pads with adjustable tension that ride along a flat bar between the hitch and trailer. It allows for turns, but limits wandering or initial fishtail/sway tendencies. So, what the heck does this have to do with M15 trailing? Well, um, a little bit? (sorry for the digression). For one thing, I am considering adding, at a minimum, a smaller sway control device when towing my M15. I have looked at brakes, and may ultimately add them to the M-15's Trailrite trailer. I have been loathe to do so given that I often launch in salt water, and with the current 12" rims/tires, tiny drums look to be the only viable option (drums and salt water are not ideal--even with galvanized backing plates/hardware and a flushing system). Also, such small brakes would likely be surge activated, so the aforementioned can of worms with respect to hilly terrain would apply. I am confident that the aforementioned near crash-and-burn event would not have happened if I had trailer brakes installed. I am less confident that the anti-sway device would have been as effective, but I am tempted to start there and run some simulated panic tests (sounds a bit scary, though). Cetol: As you might guess, I am not without opinion on the Cetol question either. I have been party to several heated discussions on this and other lists. So much depends on your intended use/exposure, indoor/outdoor storage, aesthetic preference, etc. Here is my most recent rant on the subject lifted from the archives: "OK, I guess I will be the voice of some dissent here (nothing unusual!). In my 20 years of maintaining boats (professionally, as well as many of my own), I have tried just about every coating material and method out there. I've done teak oil, synthetic oils (Teak Wonder and others), Armada, Cetol, Armada or Cetol over penetrating epoxy, Bristol Finish (small test only), etc. As Connie frequently reminds us, the appropriate material is dependent on the intended use, or in this case, exposure. An M-boat that is garaged or covered when not in use will likely enjoy great longevity with virtually any product, whereas boats/coatings left exposed in more extreme climates are subject to an accelerated decay in coating performance. For about ten years, I maintained several boats (large with extensive teak) using conventional teak oils. Longevity varied by the boat. The boat in San Diego required complete cleaning and recoating every three months. In San Francisco, I could wait four to five months, but again, I had to wash/scrub the wood to restore appearance prior to re-oiling. In Seattle, I could go six months, but green moss/algae was a problem (same drill-clean/scrub prior to application). I still like the look of a good oil (I liked 'Seafin' the best), but most clients were not pleased with the lack of longevity. Enter synthetics: (better living through chemistry?). When 'Teak Wonder' hit the market, three out of six regular clients made the switch. The San Diego, San Francisco, and Seattle boats would now go 6, 8, and 12 months respectively. I did get some gripes about the orange color (not dissimilar from the original Cetol), but most found the tradeoff worthwhile. When the time came to recoat, I used the proprietary Teak Wonder Cleaner and Brightener (two separate products). This was still a labor intensive process, and the longevity was still questionable in high UV areas. When Cetol first hit the market, I tried it on a construction project (mahogany siding on a contemporary house). I was stunned when I returned two years later to replace a faulty window unit, and the Cetol still looked new (southern exposure/very hot site). I tried it on a friend's boat with similar results. That boat still has the original Cetol (seven years +/-) with only light recoats every second year (no stripping, just very light sanding and wipe down). I then tried Armada on our then 34' pilothouse ketch. This boat had endless teak (bulwarks, caprails, trim--you name it!), and I was not interested in anything like the aforementioned oiling regime. The Armada looked great, and lasted well (in Seattle area), but did not hold up as well to abrasion. Even light brushes of a fender or line seemed to abrade away the coating. It did not crack or flake, but rather just seemed to disappear in these areas. Recoating was easy, and I still consider this a viable coating--though not with the longevity of Cetol. Ten years later, five out of six of the original vessels mentioned above have switched to Cetol. They get one light recoat annually in California--every two years in Seattle, and all still look like new. I did my M-15 in Cetol shortly after purchase (1996?), and still get compliments on the original (never recoated) finish (boat is garaged). I recently (six months ago) did another large boat in Half Moon Bay, California, and have several inquiries from others wanting me to do theirs. After six months, the teak looks as if it were done yesterday while the surrounding boats with teak oil are covered in algae/moss, etc. (Cetol is more of a 'closed coat' finish, and as such, does not support 'growies' in the grain as do oil and other finishes). The aesthetic concerns of the various coatings are undeniably a matter of personal preference. For me, the color and finish quality of a product are components in the matrix to be considered along with longevity, labor cost, climate/exposure, etc. I still have one friend who insists on annual sanding with 8-10 coats of hand-rubbed varnish (money no object) because he cannot abide the orange pigment of Cetol or other high-tech coatings. I fully agree that the rather orange color of Cetol is unfortunate. The newer Cetol 'Light' is somewhat better, but it is still quite orange relative to other finishes. If there was anything that performed nearly as well in my climate, I would certainly consider it. To date, I have found no such product. My initial test sample of 'Bristol Finish' (small block of coated teak thrown on top of my garage) is not promising, though the initial finish is beautiful. I would also like to suggest that the quality of the job (preparation and application), as well as the relative ease of use of a given product make a big difference. Cetol, alas, is not the most forgiving of products to work with. That said, I have seen numerous Cetol jobs that rival a good varnish in surface quality. This goes a long way to mitigating the, um, unusual orange tint. One recent visitor to my M15 could not believe that he was looking at Cetol. I have found a few tricks in using Cetol (original or 'Light'): 1) Thoroughly strip ALL previous coatings and clean/brighten teak (I still use 'Teak Wonder' Cleaner and Brightener for initial prep--be careful of your gel coat) 2) Sand teak to remove ridges/excessive open grain 3) Let teak dry FULLY before application 4) Mask around ALL teak with a high quality tape like 3M '14 day' blue, or 3M green as if doing a high quality paint job. 5) Apply indoors when possible, and within temperature range suggested on can (better on warm side of range). If you must apply outdoors, wait for a calm, dry day (three days, actually). 6) Do not 'whip' air into the material prior to applying (the bubbles result in surface voids) 7) Only pour out what you can use in fifteen minutes or less, and cover the can (the solvents evaporate quickly, and the result is 'dragging' of the material by the brush and/or excessive brushmarks) 8) Push the material into itself (rather than pulling the material out of area just painted), and keep a wet edge) 9) Apply a total of four coats 24 hours apart. Sand 24 hours after the third coat until surface is smooth. Final coat will lay down nicely as a result. 10) Remove masking tape by pulling tape out and away (flatly), not up. 11) Cleanup promptly. Hardened Cetol is difficult to remove! Repairs to damaged areas can be feathered in at any time. So, I know that this sounds like a lot of work. It is, but you can rest assured that if you do it correctly, you will spend a lot less time in the long run when compared to other coatings. Even though I garage my M15, I am still glad I did Cetol. Cleaning is easier, and if the current trend continues, I will not have to recoat for a very long time. When I recently bought my Flicka, I decided it too will get Cetol on all external wood. I can live with the orange. It helps brighten those gray Northwest days!! A few comments on marine lumber: 1) Teak and Mahogany are the best suited readily available species for external/above deck usage (with teak being better than mahogany in most instances) due to natural rot resistance. 2) Plantation-grown teak is now available as an alternative to destructive/non-sustainable harvest practices. 3) Letting teak 'go gray' is an option, but eventually the natural oils will leach out/oxidize. Tight old-growth or vertical-grain teak (not what most of us have on our boats) can last a very long time, but eventually unprotected teak will dry and check/split/crack. Sealing at least the end grain will help slow the drying process. 4) The high silica content of teak makes it highly resistant to pests (and eats saw blades like crazy!) 5) Most oak species are poorly suited to marine use due to poor resistance to rot. Beware structural oak with small black lines (along grain) or black spots. This is often indicative of spreading rot. Pacific Seacraft used to use oak for rudder cheek blocks as it is inherently stronger than teak. They later changed to teak when these oak blocks failed regularly due to rot (even when varnished!) All usual disclaimers apply--Just my $0.02 worth." Scott M15 #478 'bebe' PSC Flicka (unnamed) In a message dated 6/7/05 8:01:14 AM, montgomery_boats-request(a)mailman.xmission.com writes: >I'm thinking about replacing my old F150 pickup with a small SUV like the > >Honda CRV (towing capacity 1500#) Has anyone had any experience using small >SUV's >to tow/launch their M-15? > >Also its teak time. I'm sooo confused. Cetol, Teak oil? what to use? > >Thanks in advamce for the input >Don

4 3

Re:boom vang attachment--
by George Morrison 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

Tom, Jane, Sailrite.com has "Stainless Steel Welded Slug Slides" on page 32 of their catalog. They have a loop welded onto them, so you wouldn't need to add an eyestrap with machine screws. The "Sail Track Stops" on page 34 look like a good way to hold the slug in place. George M15/319

1 0

RE: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing...
by Hughston, Larry 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

Thanks for the valuable information. Again, great job! What I am doing right now is to tackle the mast. It has been dinged up quite a bit so it needs to be properly painted. I will attempt a 2 part PreKote to start. Any info you can help me with on this mast project? What is the toughest top coat to apply. I am strictly using brush application, NO spraying ! Thanks Bob. ---Larry M-15 Hull # 189 (1981) -----Original Message----- From: Bob Olson [mailto:bobo4u@qwest.net] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 9:44 AM To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats Subject: Re: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing... Larry, I used Interlux Perfection--cream color--over my epoxy repairs. I was concerned that gel coat wouldn't stick to the epoxy. I rolled it on with a smooth foam roller, and the finish came out very shiny and smooth. So, where I wanted it to blend in with the original finish, I de-glossed it with 600 grit wet and dry. Then I used Penetrol over the whole hull. On the Keel, I left it as is. Interlux Perfection is a [forgiving] two part poly urethane. It takes a few days for it to cure, but it creates a very hard finish, and it smoothes out well with the right application. A quart goes a long way. --Bob Hughston, Larry wrote: >Nice job on the Monty Bob. What finish material did you use on your >keel/hull? Did you have to polish it out later? Thanks, Larry hull # >189 (in need of lots of cosmetic help. I am doing many of the same >things here in Sacramento) > >-----Original Message----- >From: Bob Olson [mailto:bobo4u@qwest.net] >Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 7:20 PM >To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats >Subject: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing... > > >So, after two months of fixing and adding stuff to my new (old) Monty >15, I think I'm finally ready to put it in some water. > >For the curious (and picture hungry), here's a brief list of stuff that >I did; > >-- Rebuilt delaminated centerboard > >-- Re-faired the keel > >-- fixed rotten core under mast step and bow cleat > >-- Fixed adjustable motor mount and added access port > >-- Built new hatchboards (thanks Rachel for your Starboard suggestion) > >-- Added Jib downhaul > >-- Did major clean up and ding repair > >-- refinished all the teak > >'Course, I was in school full time, so it took awhile. ;-) > >Here's a link to a few shots. > >http://www.users.qwest.net/~bobo4u/monty_pix.html > >Wish I had had these available when I was trying to figure some of this >stuff out. So, feel free to borrow. > >Anybody want to go sailing? I'm getting ((((((nervous)))))), but >excited. > >--Bob Olson > >M-15 #219 "Sequel" > >P.S. I haven't been able to access the Funtigo site for months. Anybody >having the same problem? >Yes, I'm on a Mac. And yes, I've tried multiple browsers. The >interesting thing is, I cna't even access Funtigo's home page. I think >they need to change a couple of letters in their name! > > >_______________________________________________ >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > >_______________________________________________ >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > > > > _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats

3 3

Made it the rest of the way...
by B. Mayer 17 Jun '05

17 Jun '05

"Liftoff" is now on Whidbey Island. Ferry fare for a boat is highway robbery- more than twice the cost of an SUV that takes 2/3 as much space. ($31.50 for a ten minute crossing.) But I'm leaving it here so it is a one-time expense. Now I have to get it ready to sail. New winch strap, some lines replaced, make sure the motor runs, and so on. I'll probably do a dry run setting up the sails in my driveway so that I can make sure everything is shipshape. Bobbie

1 0

RE: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing...
by Hughston, Larry 17 Jun '05

17 Jun '05

Thanks Bob. I found a great source of information on all types of exotic finishes right here in Sacramento at Morrison Marine. The owner Mel Morrison is a helpful type will to share information and keep you "off the rocks". I am going to use the 2 part primer for the aluminum mast. So, we shall see. ----Larry ps. Mel did the Centerboard replacement for me. $=OUCH! It was not salvageable. -----Original Message----- From: Bob Olson [mailto:bobo4u@qwest.net] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 12:15 PM To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats Subject: Re: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing... Larry, I wouldn't have the slightest idea about how to go about painting an aluminum mast--never had to research that issue. If there weren't any structural problems, I'd probably use it as is, and save up for a new one. If you're worried about corrosion, I suppose it could be clearcoated with something. But, I can't imagine anything really sticking to aluminum other than having it annodized. But then, I don't know much about aluminum finishes. When I used to windsurf, a few manufacturers made aluminum masts. After a few years, they would corrode from the inside, weaken, and break. Not fun if you were a long ways off shore. 'Course, that was because they were used in saltwater alot, and rarely got rinsed after use. Good luck--Bob O. Hughston, Larry wrote: >Thanks for the valuable information. Again, great job! What I am >doing right now is to tackle the mast. It has been dinged up quite a >bit so it needs to be properly painted. I will attempt a 2 part >PreKote to start. Any info you can help me with on this mast project? >What is the toughest top coat to apply. I am strictly using brush application, NO spraying ! > >Thanks Bob. ---Larry M-15 Hull # 189 (1981) > >-----Original Message----- >From: Bob Olson [mailto:bobo4u@qwest.net] >Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 9:44 AM >To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats >Subject: Re: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing... > > >Larry, > >I used Interlux Perfection--cream color--over my epoxy repairs. I was >concerned that gel coat wouldn't stick to the epoxy. >I rolled it on with a smooth foam roller, and the finish came out very >shiny and smooth. So, where I wanted it to blend in with the original >finish, I de-glossed it with 600 grit wet and dry. Then I used Penetrol >over the whole hull. On the Keel, I left it as is. > >Interlux Perfection is a [forgiving] two part poly urethane. It takes a >few days for it to cure, but it creates a very hard finish, and it >smoothes out well with the right application. A quart goes a long way. > >--Bob > >Hughston, Larry wrote: > > > >>Nice job on the Monty Bob. What finish material did you use on your >>keel/hull? Did you have to polish it out later? Thanks, Larry hull # >>189 (in need of lots of cosmetic help. I am doing many of the same >>things here in Sacramento) >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Bob Olson [mailto:bobo4u@qwest.net] >>Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 7:20 PM >>To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats >>Subject: M_Boats: OK, I think I'm ready to sail this thing... >> >> >>So, after two months of fixing and adding stuff to my new (old) Monty >>15, I think I'm finally ready to put it in some water. >> >>For the curious (and picture hungry), here's a brief list of stuff >>that I did; >> >>-- Rebuilt delaminated centerboard >> >>-- Re-faired the keel >> >>-- fixed rotten core under mast step and bow cleat >> >>-- Fixed adjustable motor mount and added access port >> >>-- Built new hatchboards (thanks Rachel for your Starboard >>suggestion) >> >>-- Added Jib downhaul >> >>-- Did major clean up and ding repair >> >>-- refinished all the teak >> >>'Course, I was in school full time, so it took awhile. ;-) >> >>Here's a link to a few shots. >> >>http://www.users.qwest.net/~bobo4u/monty_pix.html >> >>Wish I had had these available when I was trying to figure some of >>this stuff out. So, feel free to borrow. >> >>Anybody want to go sailing? I'm getting ((((((nervous)))))), but >>excited. >> >>--Bob Olson >> >>M-15 #219 "Sequel" >> >>P.S. I haven't been able to access the Funtigo site for months. >>Anybody having the same problem? Yes, I'm on a Mac. And yes, I've >>tried multiple browsers. The interesting thing is, I cna't even access >>Funtigo's home page. I think they need to change a couple of letters >>in their name! >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats >> >>_______________________________________________ >>http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > >_______________________________________________ >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > > > > _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats

1 0