Got Design Questions?

hodo

Member III
My 85 38 has no eye bolt, but I tied the bitter end around the center of a 10"long piece of 2" nylon rod, as it will not pass through the lead hole for to the windlass.
Harold, Mischief :devil: Maker
 

mgruning

Member I
Keel modification of the 1978 Ericsson 35

I am totally new to this blog so hopefully I am in the right place asking the right person or persons. I have had a 1978 Ericson 35 with an overall displacement of I believe about 11,500 pounds and a "swept fin" keel of about 5,000 pounds. It has the original mast and the basic sail plan is a Full North Main and a 135 roller furling jib.

I am almost 70 and would like to keep sailing as long as I can. I love almost everything about the boat except its tenderness– When it gets about 15 or 16 kn, I have to reduce sail area and I want to know if anyone has modified their keel, for example with a lead boot superimposed on the existing keel to make it a stiffer rig? I am going to consult a naval architect but wanted to get feedback from existing owners as to whether this has been successfully tried before.

Thank you for any help you can provide and I'm not sure if I look for responses in my personal email or here. If you want to respond to my personal email it is mgruning@Gmail.com
 

Martin King

Sustaining Member
What's wrong with reefing at 15 kts? The 35 Mk II had a tall rig with high aspect sails for good light air performance-the type of winds typically found on the west coast. Additional weight on the keel sounds like a bad idea.

Martin
 

CSMcKillip

Moderator
Moderator
My own 2 cents

yes you are in the right place to post and you should automatically get an email from the forum for any replies to your threads. Personal experience is that the boats sail great in light air up to 15 and then we can get a bit of weather helm and the boats become tender. At this point on our boat it's time me to put in a reef in the main sail and adjust the sailplan to fit the conditions.

If I was going to put lead or a boot on the keel I would rather spend the monies on a boom furler so I could easily adjust the main sail and keep the boat flat. Just the cost of haul out here is steep about 750.00 and the cost to add weight to the keel would be another great cost not to mention a structural engineer should take a look at the boat, keel and attachments to even see if added weight could be added.

hope this helps and welcome aboard the group..
 

Frank Langer

1984 Ericson 30+, Nanaimo, BC
I'm not too far behind you in age, but I definitely would not risk ruining your lovely boat with a substantial keel modification. I know that there are companies that build bulbs to add to keels, and naval architects who can suggest options, but I still think that the boat will likely not sail as well and it will be harder to sell with that modification.
I agree fully with the other posts that it's much preferable to ensure that you have decent sails (not bagged out which will increase heeling), adjustments like outhaul, boom vang, cunningham, correct halyard tension, leech lines, etc. and if necessary add a third reef point to the mainsail. On a previous boat I had four headsails--a 153%, a 135%, a 100%, and a 78%, and the smallest of these and a double reef allowed me to sail in very windy conditions. On my current E30+ I have a 125% and a 95%, both on a furler, which allows me to manage windy conditions reasonably well.
Good luck, and let us know what you decide.
Frank
 

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Moderator
Blogs Author
All you need is a working reefing system. Putting in and shaking out mainsail reefs should be almost as easy as putting the brakes on in a car. Slab reefing needs upgrades like any other gear, and the reef systems older boats are usually lousy. For effortless reefing with one hand, get a Tides Sail Track, modern lazyjacks, full length battens, and lead the lines to the cockpit. I consider our boats tender too--and responsive, and fun, and proven. A "stiff" boat will knock your guts out. We prefer to reef early and sail easy. It's what sailors do.

I'm 72. Reefing is a pain in the butt for anybody with junk gear 30 years old. Redesign the reefing plan, not the boat. Everything will change.
 

Rick R.

Contributing Partner
We reef the main and 135 at around 13-15 knots. The boat sails faster and the Admiral is happier. :nerd:
 
Last edited:

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
Main thoughts

I am totally new to this blog so hopefully I am in the right place asking the right person or persons. I have had a 1978 Ericson 35 with an overall displacement of I believe about 11,500 pounds and a "swept fin" keel of about 5,000 pounds. It has the original mast and the basic sail plan is a Full North Main and a 135 roller furling jib.

I am almost 70 and would like to keep sailing as long as I can. I love almost everything about the boat except its tenderness– When it gets about 15 or 16 kn, I have to reduce sail area and I want to know if anyone has modified their keel, for example with a lead boot superimposed on the existing keel to make it a stiffer rig? I am going to consult a naval architect but wanted to get feedback from existing owners as to whether this has been successfully tried before.

Thank you for any help you can provide and I'm not sure if I look for responses in my personal email or here. If you want to respond to my personal email it is mgruning@Gmail.com
I am about two years older than you, and yup I do have less energy for this stuff than I did twenty years ago. Having said that I would not want to change over to a slow or inefficient sailboat design that needed 15 kts just to start sailing.
EY built good performing boats. :)

About your keel-- no real way to attach a "shoe" to the bottom due to having internal ballast. I could do that to ours (external lead fin keel) if I had enough $$, and have sort of considered doing it to reduce the draft from 6' to about 5'. Spending about $10K. to do that is not in our budget!

The root of the problem, as I read it, is that your boat is heeling unacceptably in true winds of 15 knots -- and above. Considering your boat's very healthy ballast ratio, I would agree with the experts that it's really time to reef. Our boat is lighter and has less ballast than yours and we need a reef at around 18 to 20 true.

It's been a long time since your hull left the builder and the original rigger. I would also hazard a guess that the original reefing gear is in need of a full upgrade. Old sheaves and blocks might be sticking or just plain inefficiently located.

And then there is another factor to consider in a boat that has been through one or multiples of prior owners -- sails.
I do not know the condition of your sails, especially the main, but I do know that a main that is well-used and stretched will usually cause heeling due to 1) too much belly from stretching, and 2) that shape will have migrated aft as the material stretched over the years/decades.

Further, if the prior owner had installed a new main in recent past, he may have chosen to have a maximum-draft shape done to enhance lighter air racing. Such a shape is often not so much fun for general recreational sailing. So, if the sail cloth is in good condition, a recut will often reduce heel with minimal $ outlay. Any good loft can do this, and a good loft will also not be afraid to tell a potential customer to put the potential recut expenditure towards a new main if the present one is too marginal in condition.

http://www.ericsonyachts.org/infoexchange/showthread.php?1729-Self-Tacking-Jibs-anyone/page3
Just for comparison and illustration, Iif you look at our boat in the picture in reply 32 in this thread, our full main is trimmed out pretty "flat" that evening and this photo was taken in about 12 to 15 kts true.

Best of luck in getting to flatter sailing and maximum velocity!
:)

Loren
 
Last edited:

Seth

Sustaining Partner
a classic boat

Martin is right. Moreover, your boat is one of most and iconic designs of its era. Many people think that boat is almost perfect, and I just can't imagine butchering it with modifications. As Martin and other folks have said, your concern is not a boat design problem, it is just a matter of having the right sail combination for the conditions you sail in. There is no boat in the world which performs ideally over a wide wind speed range with a single sail combination. What is good on 0 to 15 knots by definition is wrong for 15 plus. The simplest thing is to begin furling your genoa when begin feeling overpowered, then reef once or twice, and furl some more. 2 reefs and 50 percent rolled headsail should be comfortable in up to 25 or 30 knots. If you will typically sail in more than 10 to 12, consider using a 100 to 110 percent headsail instead of the 135. This way you should only see less performance below about 10 knots, and not have to begin reefing until 18 or 20 knots. Use the right sail combo and keep your classic a classic. Cheers
 

Jason G

Member II
Looking for push pit of prints to build one E34-2

I ended up with a bent port side pushpit on my 1987 E34-2 and was hoping to find either a replacement or a blue print to fabricate a new one. I have left a message at a local shop called Railmakers in Everett WA that supposedly does a great job building railings and pullpits etc. for boats. They have not returned my call yet. Any my information of suggestions would be appreciated.

Thsnks-
Jason
 

footrope

Contributing Partner
Blogs Author
I ended up with a bent port side pushpit on my 1987 E34-2 and was hoping to find either a replacement or a blue print to fabricate a new one. I have left a message at a local shop called Railmakers in Everett WA that supposedly does a great job building railings and pullpits etc. for boats. They have not returned my call yet. Any my information of suggestions would be appreciated.

Thsnks-
Jason
I recommend Railmakers. They'll likely be able to repair your damage. They repaired three of my creased and bent stanchions. Two of them were gate stanchions. They also did a custom bend on my new angle guard. Good luck!

Craig
 

toddster

Curator of Broken Parts
Blogs Author
My pulpit was looking kind of sad from getting sideswiped at the berth. Repeatedly. So, I finally took off all the bow hardware this week and... no wonder. That thing is made of such thin tubing that it's kind of trivial to bend it back into shape. Kind of disappointing in a way.
Anyway, if there aren't any kinks in the tube, it might be worth a try to just bend it back.
 

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Moderator
Blogs Author
We have a Railmakers here, too. Must be a popular name.

With our guys, if you just fax them a sketch of what you need, they make it. One-inch stainless is easy to work, pulpits are easy for them, and they usually tell me a pro drawing isn't necessary.

All you need is an angle gauge, to measure the angles of the straight parts. You can estimate the radiuses, but they come out pretty standard from the rough dimensions.

....For what it's worth.
 

Jason G

Member II
E34 Pushpit Rail fixed and re-installed

image.jpg

Finally took the time to remove the bent rail and have it fixed. I used a conduit bender and some 3/4" EMT conduit to bend up a pattern to match the curve of the transom to help Railmakers out. They put a joggle in the lower rail to clear the backstay. Overall I'm pretty happy with the repair.

-Jason
 

Attachments

Last edited:

JMR

Junior Member
Comparing the E34-2 and E34-200

Hello there!

Hope I'm doing this correctly.

I'm currently in the market for a Great Lakes racer/cruiser in the 35' range, and have taken a liking to two Ericson 34s. One is an 87 E34-2, and the other is a 92 E34-200. Both are in good shape and appear to have been well cared for.

The question I have is, 'How are these two boats different from one another?'

I'm aware of the change in builder from Ericson to PS, but can't find any reference to differences in how the two builders actually built the boats. Nor can I find any reference to interior differences. There also seems to be some prevailing sense that the PS built E34s are "better," but nothing to back that up.

Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated.

JMR
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
Hello there!

Hope I'm doing this correctly.

I'm currently in the market for a Great Lakes racer/cruiser in the 35' range, and have taken a liking to two Ericson 34s. One is an 87 E34-2, and the other is a 92 E34-200. Both are in good shape and appear to have been well cared for.

The question I have is, 'How are these two boats different from one another?'

I'm aware of the change in builder from Ericson to PS, but can't find any reference to differences in how the two builders actually built the boats. Nor can I find any reference to interior differences. There also seems to be some prevailing sense that the PS built E34s are "better," but nothing to back that up.

Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated.

JMR
Having shopped an Ericson 34 built by PSC, my take on it is that their off-the-shelf hardware was -sometimes- a little better. Like their wiring harness for all the DC and AC panels. Since they were using the scantlings of the King-designed Ericson's, I would guess that the construction was just as good, but not likely to be any better. After all they were using almost all of the same tooling and patterns. They were not likely to be changing too much (except for the new stern boarding platform on their Ericson 38-200), since they were having to watch their money pretty carefully thru the 90's.

PSC did do one thing that I frown on: they used Volvo diesels a lot, due to a cheapie OEM price deal from Volvo.
While some folks seem happy with Volvo diesels in that size range I would not want one; indeed we passed up a deal (overpriced, anyhow) a couple years ago on PSC Ericson 34 because it was already on its second Volvo diesel, and that one was seeping water from the heat exchanger assembly.

We actually made a cash offer, contingent on our replacing that engine with a Beta, but the buyer was unmoved by our logic. He had set a price pretending that all of the maintenance was up to date, but in fact None of it was. :rolleyes:
I offered an amount that would allow me to invest about 25K to bring the boat to current standards.
While we did not get that larger Ericson, we did install a new Beta 25, last year and will likely keep our boat a long long time. :egrin:

Not like I have an opinion or anything, but I am used to Ericson Yacht construction quality, and am not interested in lesser boats.

Note B: do not overlook a well maintained Ericson 35-3. Same hull and rig but with a different interior. And of course, for a bit "smaller" 34 footer, you might consider an Olson 34.

Welcome to the site.
Fair Winds!
Loren
 
Last edited:

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Moderator
Blogs Author
Loren covered the important stuff.

The biggest difference in these boats over the years was the layout belowdecks. Since both of your boats have the head aft (which means lightly larger quarterberth, slightly smaller V-berth), any other differences are minor and probably matters of taste.

Overall condition and existing usable gear (autopilot, instruments, windlass, sail inventory and so on ) will be tipping points.
 

JMR

Junior Member
Comparing the E34-2 and E34-200

Thanks for the quick response, Loren.

One thing that I've 'heard' but cannot substantiate is that the hulls of the 34-2 were essentially two halves joined together, while the PS built 34-200s were made from a solid, single piece of fiberglass. Issues of quality aside, it would seem that one fewer potential point of failure would be preferable, but I'd like to know more before forming my own opinion.

Also, some folks refer to PS's as having higher quality interiors and different interior layouts...Is any of that true or is it just the standard 'the one I bought is better' stuff?

JMR
 
Top