[Public-List] Shaft Log replacement/improvement ideas?

[Rachel]

On Nov 27, 2011, at 8:32 AM, Jeffrey wrote:

> I'm curious about this fiberglass tube approach. Is there a downside? Why
> didn't Whitby build them like this originally??

I'm not sure why they were not built with fiberglass stern tubes originally, but I can make a couple of guesses:

1) They were still building with "wood brain" in some cases.  If you take a look at the inside of the first-generation of fiberglass rudder on the A-30, you can see what I mean.  I think the metal stern tube is used reasonably often on wooden boats, if I'm not mistaken (not a wooden boat expert though).

2) The hardware was handy/available.

3) It went in reasonably quickly, with no waiting for things to cure, sanding, fairing, etc.  Time is money in a boatyard.

4) I would guess that strong, precise, pre-made fiberglass tubes were not readily available then (such as now, when you can get G-10 tubes from McMaster-Carr and other places).  Laying them up would have been a pain compared to just buying the metal ones.

I can't really see any downsides to the fiberglass tube, myself --- except that it's somewhat more labor-intensive to install, as compared to caulking up the metal one, putting it in place, and installing the two fasteners.  On the other hand, it won't deteriorate or leak (no bedding), so in the long run it's probably less trouble.

That's not to say there is anything wrong with what's there if it's in good condition.  In fact, I had the shaft and cutless bearing out of my boat, and if there had been any issues with the stern tube I would have replaced it at that time, and it would have been with a glassed in fiberglass tube; but I elected not to take out the one that was there since it was in excellent condition (freshwater) and there were no signs of leakage. (I had already machined down the stuffing box to match the inside of the stern tube.)  But would I prefer a fiberglass one? Yes.

Rachel
ex-#221

 1322402097.0