C Dory 25 transom

[thataway]

Again, let me make it clear that I purchased "Frequent Sea" knowing that there might be transom problems. In the thread on the core, I posted further pictures of the transom at the lowest part. There was water intrusion into the core for about 1" around the screws from the transducer which was not properly sealed. What was a bit suprising as we got into more cuts today was that there was a void between the balsa core and the aft skin stern laminate--this should have been filled with some matt and filler at the least. Any water which might get down into the farest aft core, can migrate from side to side. For example if there was a defect near the drain plug for some reason allowed water into the core layer, water would get into the lower laminate and balsa core and migrate. We had this dry, and then washed the boat--it became wet again. We hope that this water came from the washing. We tilted the boat until the transom was way low, and no water migrated to this area, so we assume there is no breach in the inner hull. (however even at this attitude water was draining out from around the fuel tank (plastic)--and I would be concerned if I had an aluminum tank if water could sit around it).

Now to the top of the transom. We removed the black cap, and found a long crack on the starboard side it was about 16" long. Not unexpected because the surveyor had mentioned this. The good news is that no where we checked did we find any water in the plywood core, or breakdown of the plywood transom core. The bad news is that we found that there was a void between the top of the wood in the transom and where the fiberglass rapped over it--the plywood looked as if it had been coated with polyester. It also looked as if there was a layer of mat and polyester between the two sheets of plywood--this is common. There were three disturbing things we found:
one was that the plywood did not come all of the way up to the top of the transom--it missed it by about 5/8". The area between the top of the plywood and the layer of glass was absolutely empty of any material.

The next item was that the plywood stopped inside of the edge of the splashwell. Most boats the wooden core goes all of the way from side to side and thus directs the motor load to the sides of the hull. In this case the motor load was thus directed only to the sides of the splash well. This might have been OK, except there was virtually no glass where the spashwell and cap over the transom meet--basically were the cracks in the corners. These are more than gelcoat cracks--and there is just thick polyester in this area, with virtually no glass. The foreward face of the transom looked nice and thick--I thought "they did it right"--well wrong--there were some small cracks in the top top of this, and it turns out that instead of being 1/2" of solid glass, like I thought, that this foreward part of the transom is has about 1/8" of glass on its faces and about 1/2" of low density filler with polyester in the middle.

The final item was that the plywood was not marine grade. There were several large voids. Fortunately there is no water intrusion or breakdown, so the transom can be rebuilt to be waterproof and stronger.

We are filling the accessable top of the transom with layers of biaxial cloth and core material. We are spreading the load of the transom out on the inside (and some on the outside) with layers of roving and biaxial cloth. This is not ideal, but it is what we have to work with. After we finish this the boat will be much stronger than when built.

What I found may only be what is present in Hull # 30. I have no way of knowing if other transoms are built this same way. If there are cracks on the inside of the splash pan and the transom, I would be suspicious. If the thickness of the transom (looking from the inside you will see roving on the inner surface, and it is much thicker where there is a wooden core. In our boat, the thicker area, stops at the area where the splash pan joins the the transom.

I have posted photos of the cuts and what we have found in the "Thataway" album.

[William and Beth Tucker]

Bob, is any of this damage covered by the factory warranty ? Tucker

[thataway]

My understanding is that the factory is standing behind the transom because the previous owner had already contacted them about what was found at the survey. This was suggested by the members of this forum.

The previous owner, unfortunately, did not realize that the cockpit floor was a factory defect, so It may be treated as part of the "non transferable" warantee.

My impression was that the factory is interested in safety issues. For example I was told if the fuel tank was leaking, it would make the boat non functional and the factory would cover it. But that just a soft deck or broken deck didn't make the boat non fuctional and would not be covered. I stated that I disagreed. So we will see.

Again, I don't know how many other boats have this problem--but I have seen photos of cracks in the corner of the spash pan--and I think that many of use thought this was just gelcoat. It appears to be more than that. I must also say, that I have five shipwrights look at the construction and they all felt it was improper as I outlined.

[journey on]

Bob, I'm a little confused when I look at your pictures (and a lot confused at other times.) Would you mind posting a picture giving a longer view of the transome damage? I can't tell if I'm looking forward or aft with the pictures you posted.

In any case the construction there looks like a very shoddy job, and I'm surprised that C-Dory would do work like that.

We're in Carlsbad, NM heading towards Lake Superior, and on the rough roads, I can well imagine the beating the transom gets from the motor. Those interstates have had a couple too many semis goting over them.

By the way camping in the 25 at a RV park is a blast. They're happy to have you, because it gives everybody something to talk about.

The southern Boris, heading north.

[thataway]

I have added two photos. #129 shows a view of the stb side of the transom and the splash well (foreward of the transom) You can see the area where we have taken off the top of the transom and where the void is under this top. #130 shows the top of the transom looking toward the outboard in the center. This shows the crack as it appeared when we first took the cap cover off the transom. #122 shows the crack in the top going the other way (toward the stb side of the hull and the crack in the corner of the splash well. The area under this crack was mostly filler, not structural glass--and the crack was caused by the transom load pushing against this area, which was not adequately backed up by glass. I probably should have gotten an aerial view before we cut into the transom cap.

[thataway]

I have added several more photos which clarify the way the boat was built. The transom, was molded with the hull. The two pieces of the 3/4" plywood were put in place (not long enough to spread out the load for some reason). In photo 131, you see that there is green gel coat (the second layer sprayed) and white gel coat (the first layer sprayed), which were wrapped over the top of the transom. This was then covered with a layer of grey filler and then gelcoated. No glass covered the top of the transom. If you look at this photo, the foreward part is the molding for the splash pan, with two layers of glass, and pink filler between them. The gel coat of the splash pan is on the outside, and the inside of the transom is mat this is where the hull and deck (spash pan--outboard well) are joined, just butted together and because there is no glass there, the crack developed. (fortunately no plywood core damage). The next photo shows to the left (where the splash pan sweeps up, and again, filler with no glass, except on the inside. We have re-inforced this area, with other layers on the inside. The third photo (133) shows a similar pattern on the left. We will be wrapping glass over this.

We drilled more large holes in the bottom of the transom and when we moved the boat, water came out from the area aft of the balsa core. So we are going to pull the trim tabs, and cut out the bottom of the transom where this void between the core and the transom is. Then we will glass in solidly with the epoxy sealing off the balsa core, and making where the void was, solid glass--roving, biaxial, and matt. These will be wrapped around the bottom of the boat--and faired to replicate the origional molding. This area will be much stronger, and will not allow water to penetrate the core.

We found that there was a open connection around the transom wood where water was comming in from above the core at the transom. We have identified this from below--but not from inside of the boat (basically this almost impossiable to access, but we will put a camera in there and take photos to see if we can ID were the opening is. We also found some more filler, which was foam like, and not water proof. All of this will be replaced with solid glass. I cannot speak for other boats, but if there is an area which allows water to get to the core where there is a void aft, it will saturate the core. We basically had to open the entire lower transom.
Again, this will be filled with solid glass laminates, and not allow any water in the future.

[William and Beth Tucker]

Bob, Bob and reBob..Thanks for all of the pictures and input..I have learned so much from you and others on this site...I think the factory should cover all of your repairs and stand up and take notice of problems and put quality control in place... If i needed a hart doctor ; the best would only be acceptable and not the second best... Only the best built boat is acceptable and not seconds..Keep your life jacket on,,Tucker..

[Best Day]

Bob, sorry to hear about the problems on your 25. You would think that by hull #30 they would know how to properly make a transom. Hopefully this poor construction is an isolated issue and more and more C-Dory owners won't start discovering the same problems.

One question for you. When you say that the mounting screws for the transducer weren't seal properly what do you mean? Were they not sealed at all or did the Bostic fail?

Thanks,
Bill

[journey on]

Bob, that transom is interesting to say the least. It looks like they sawed up some boards, slapped a little mat and gelcoat around them and let 'er rip. However, a Honda engine weighs ~500 #, and there is usually 100 # of kicker sitting there plus 130 HP pushing the boat along, which makes it one of the most highly loaded areas in the boat. I have two questions:

1. Though you're the only one with this problem that's posted, is there anything about the boat that would make it unique? Such as repaired areas?
2. How does the engine load on the transom transfer into the side of the boat? Is there a strong layer of fiberglass that bonds those boards to the sides, and thus supports the load? What's to prevent those boards from tearing out of the back, when you hit a nice wave?

You said that the factory would work with you on the repair. What are their comments as to the uniqueness of this problem? Are they doing anything differently now? Especially before S/N 125. I assume that you discussed what you found with them.

Thanks, Boris

[Jack in Alaska]

I thought about buying that boat a hundred times. Ran the cost factor of a 10k mile trip to get it etc. I am glad it was you and not me.
Hopefully you will end up with a safe servicable boat. It is a real project now and CD should stand behind the cost of repair in my opinion. My opinion is free though and that is about what it is worth.
Good luck in your project and keep all of us informed.

Jack

[Pat Anderson]

Bob knew he was getting a project boat when he bought it, just not exactly to what extent - the price reflected it - and it is clear it ended up in the right hands, somebody with the ability to deal with it.

We have CD25 Hull #115, May 2005. I really have no confidence that ours is necessarily any better constructed. I have posted this before, but you had to see the difference between the Kent and Auburn factories to understand. In Kent, craftsmen you knew by first name were building your boat (our 2003 CD22). They turned out 6 boats a month. CD25s were not built in Kent. I believe until the move to Auburn they were being built in the Olympic factory in Monroe, which C-Dory had purchased. In Auburn, an army of nameless, faceless production workers were churning out the boats at a relentless pace - we were told then 25 boats a month, and now, it is probably much more than that. I will not forget the sign on the wall - "Saturday is a mandatory work day for all production workers." I don't know, but I'll bet turnover was pretty high. It was this environment I am sure that led Gene and Buck to no longer want to be associated with C-Dory (and on to the Cape Cruiser fiasco, but that's another story).

Still, we were able to watch our CD25 go together, to photograph it - but unlike Bob Austin, we did not know what to look for, would not have understood what we were seeing. And of course, we weren't there 24/7 - we have no idea how our transom is put together. Andrew was still there, and did good work on our boat, and Rick was still the rigger, so what these guys did is probably good. But what shortcuts the production guys took buried under fiberglass, who know?

I do suspect that the CD22s are less likely to have QC problems than the CD25s - they have built a LOT more of them and it is probably a lot more standardized in production methods. The CD25 is not just a bigger CD22 - it is a different critter.

Then the icing on the cake - the Laythamized C-Dory company. No factory direct sales, no factory service, no factory warranty work - the ONE thing that really had always elevated C-Dory above the others. I think every decision C-Dory has made since the move to Auburn has simply been wrong. Fierce owner loyalty was the most valuable asset C-Dory had, and they are in the process of squandering it. I was the "old" C-Dory's #1 cheerleader. I just don't feel that way any longer.

[John Hoffmann]

May I introduce myself before I respond, I am the CFO at C-Dory and was recruited by Ranger Jeff back in September of 2006.

First of all, may I say these comments on the nameless faces of the hard working individuals at the Auburn facility are hard to hear. We have a fantastic team of skilled craftsmen that take great pride in what they do. Our product is of the highest quality and we consistently beat industry warranty averages. In fact, our dealers comment on how well our boats arrive at their stores, unlike other quality boat brands they carry.

As for the Lathamization of C-Dory, Tom brings years of discipline and experience to the table which will allow C-Dory to continue to produce the highest quality product while allowing us to maintain profitability and ensure a future for our employees and loyal customers. The policies and procedures he has implemented over the last year have allowed the company to obtain CE and NMMA certification for all our boats - a rigirous and critical process not every boat manufacturer can get through.

Furthermore, you will be hard pressed to find a boat manufacturer of any substance that can afford to provide retail service. We felt a better strategy was to leave the service of our products to the professionals better set up to manage this on our behalf, our dealers, and focus on building boats. Also, in the local market where we were providing this support, you now have three service centers through Lake Union Searay, a platinum embassodor level dealer. However, we are still committed to supporting customer service issues in all our markets and Bret Reynolds

May I suggest you come out to Auburn and see what we are doing these days as I think you will find we are still the same company, maybe just with a few new faces and a little more grown up.

John

[BrentB]

Mr Hoffman

Any plans to update the C-Dory web page?

Brochures are dated 2004.
http://www.c-dory.com/Table%20of%20Contents.htm

[Tom Latham]

Brent:

Brochures are in the midst of a re-design. In fact, the layout was approved last week. Photo shoots have been scheduled for our new models as well as new interior shots. They will be designed to have a look similar to our new ad campaign. Once final revisions have occurred, I'll post the new ads in our Factory photo album. Finally, the website will be completely re-vamped over the next 60 days, again with a similar look, as well as improved navigation.

Thanks,

Tom

[iggy]

John -

Your participation on this thread is appreciated. OTOH, as I read, and re-read your message, I see a lot of discussion of re-organization, certification, and so on; apparently laudable steps in the right direction, but almost completely irrelevant to the structural issues Bob Austin has been describing. I am one of many C-Dory wannabees. I attended the Auburn Factory Party and had a great time. The camaraderie among staff and boat owners was simply amazing. I have also attended several local dinners and C-Brat gatherings, and have been the grateful recipient of several rides from enthusiastic owners.

I fully realize that 'corporate policies' and 'legal advice' have a great influence on what you can, and cannot say, in a public forum. Nevertheless, your message is clearly aimed at Bob Anderson's comments, and notably devoid of any mention of the fundamental structural issues that Bob Austin is addressing.

Among others, I was also interested in the boat that Bob Austin acquired. Thank God I was not in a position to take advantage of this 'opportunity'! From Bob's descriptions I suspect that the number of C-Brat members that could handle a 'project' of this magnitude might literally be counted on one hand.