[pHotoman41]

Hello everyone.  This is my first post in this forum.  I am looking to purchase of a 31 foot Tiara Open.  Overall, the boat is in excellent condition.  I am turning to the forum members for any guidance you might provide as I am considering how I want to proceed.

The boat survey revealed an area of water penetration and possible delamination of roughly a 2 foot area located starboard behind the anchor locker.  The water penetration was detected back about 6 feet on total.  An area on the port side roughly 2 feet back from the anchor locker also shows high water elevation but, no delamination.  The source appears to be the anchor locker drains which lack proper bedding.

We obtained two proposals to fix this problem.  The first involves cutting through the exterior, replacing the damaged balsa core, applying resin and then repairing and painting the hull.  I neglected to mention the hull is already painted.  The second involves a process where vacuum pumps are used to draw out the water through small holes drilled from inside the anchor locker.  Once the water is extracted, the area would be injected with resin. 

The first option is more expensive.  It would appear to be the most extensive given the exterior will have a large hole cut in.  However, it will obviously allow for visual inspection of damage and the repair.  The second option lacks the ability too visually inspect the damage and the repair.  Both fiberglass contractors claim they have used their respective processes on many boats with satisfactory results. 

I am trying to decide which proposal to accept.  At this stage, I am leaning slightly towards proposal one because it seems to be more likely to lead to the best repair since the mechanic will be able to see the damage and his repair.  However, I am not excited by the exterior damage it will cause even if it's satisfactorily repaired.  It seems like it will be the weak link in the structure.  I could certainly be wrong about that.

Have any forum members had a similar experience or knowledge to provide some thoughts on these 2 processes?

[kurts52]

Hello everyone.  This is my first post in this forum.  I am looking to purchase of a 31 foot Tiara Open.  Overall, the boat is in excellent condition.  I am turning to the forum members for any guidance you might provide as I am considering how I want to proceed.

The boat survey revealed an area of water penetration and possible delamination of roughly a 2 foot area located starboard behind the anchor locker.  The water penetration was detected back about 6 feet on total.  An area on the port side roughly 2 feet back from the anchor locker also shows high water elevation but, no delamination.  The source appears to be the anchor locker drains which lack proper bedding.

We obtained two proposals to fix this problem.  The first involves cutting through the exterior, replacing the damaged balsa core, applying resin and then repairing and painting the hull.  I neglected to mention the hull is already painted.  The second involves a process where vacuum pumps are used to draw out the water through small holes drilled from inside the anchor locker.  Once the water is extracted, the area would be injected with resin. 

The first option is more expensive.  It would appear to be the most extensive given the exterior will have a large hole cut in.  However, it will obviously allow for visual inspection of damage and the repair.  The second option lacks the ability too visually inspect the damage and the repair.  Both fiberglass contractors claim they have used their respective processes on many boats with satisfactory results. 

I am trying to decide which proposal to accept.  At this stage, I am leaning slightly towards proposal one because it seems to be more likely to lead to the best repair since the mechanic will be able to see the damage and his repair.  However, I am not excited by the exterior damage it will cause even if it's satisfactorily repaired.  It seems like it will be the weak link in the structure.  I could certainly be wrong about that.

Have any forum members had a similar experience or knowledge to provide some thoughts on these 2 processes?

Having done some fiberglass I agree with your first option. Getting all the wet material out of there will go to a better job in the long run. If done properly this repair could actually be as strong and good as new.....if not better. You can contact Tiara and get the gel coat that they used when they built the boat. 
Granted years of sun and elements may do some discoloring of your hull the way it is today. May take a little tweaking but a good glass guy can match it almost perfect. 

Kurt

[pHotoman41]

Hello everyone.  This is my first post in this forum.  I am looking to purchase of a 31 foot Tiara Open.  Overall, the boat is in excellent condition.  I am turning to the forum members for any guidance you might provide as I am considering how I want to proceed.

The boat survey revealed an area of water penetration and possible delamination of roughly a 2 foot area located starboard behind the anchor locker.  The water penetration was detected back about 6 feet on total.  An area on the port side roughly 2 feet back from the anchor locker also shows high water elevation but, no delamination.  The source appears to be the anchor locker drains which lack proper bedding.

We obtained two proposals to fix this problem.  The first involves cutting through the exterior, replacing the damaged balsa core, applying resin and then repairing and painting the hull.  I neglected to mention the hull is already painted.  The second involves a process where vacuum pumps are used to draw out the water through small holes drilled from inside the anchor locker.  Once the water is extracted, the area would be injected with resin. 

The first option is more expensive.  It would appear to be the most extensive given the exterior will have a large hole cut in.  However, it will obviously allow for visual inspection of damage and the repair.  The second option lacks the ability too visually inspect the damage and the repair.  Both fiberglass contractors claim they have used their respective processes on many boats with satisfactory results. 

I am trying to decide which proposal to accept.  At this stage, I am leaning slightly towards proposal one because it seems to be more likely to lead to the best repair since the mechanic will be able to see the damage and his repair.  However, I am not excited by the exterior damage it will cause even if it's satisfactorily repaired.  It seems like it will be the weak link in the structure.  I could certainly be wrong about that.

Have any forum members had a similar experience or knowledge to provide some thoughts on these 2 processes?

Having done some fiberglass I agree with your first option. Getting all the wet material out of there will go to a better job in the long run. If done properly this repair could actually be as strong and good as new.....if not better. You can contact Tiara and get the gel coat that they used when they built the boat. 
Granted years of sun and elements may do some discoloring of your hull the way it is today. May take a little tweaking but a good glass guy can match it almost perfect. 

Kurt

Kurt,  Thanks for your input.  This is something I haven't experienced before so I am trying to determine the best solution.  Happy boating.

[Outlaw]

Photoman,

I had a contract on a 38 Open that had a similar issue. Much larger area of de-lamination, but no evidence of any moisture. The seller agreed to have the boat repaired using your second method. After the repairs were made, I was able to bring my surveyor back in. The areas that were repaired seemed OK, however there were several areas that were not repaired by the tech, and we walked. I should note two things: 1. I was told at the time that if moisture had been present that system # 2 would not be a good remedy. I do not know if this is true or not, just what I was told. 2. Even in the areas that were repaired, although good from a structural standpoint, the boat would have to have been repainted ($20K).