cracks, leaks, foam, and old bad work.

How many other C-dory owners have found these cracks, whether gelcoat or otherwise?

Of course I'm particularly curious about Tomcat owners who operate in the ocean. I will always be in the ocean, in a lot of seas, loaded with dive gear (though certainly not beyond the capacity ratings for the vessel).

Thanks
 
I know this really shouldn't have any bearing on a boat solidly constructed but it makes me wonder if the added weight of a roof air might play a part in these cracks. I know Bob went the extra mile by bracing his roof when he installed his AC but I'd think a 45 mile per hour plus boat in heavy seas with 100 extra pounds on the roof may have some bearing on the cracks. Bob I'm not implying by any means that you abused the boat just wondering if the extra weight might have played a part. My gut feeling from your description is the boat wasn't properly laid up if those are in fact structural cracks.
 
I dobut if the air conditioner had any effect. The cabin structure is well braced, and there are no stress cracks on the sides of the roof or cabin sides. If anything, the hull is flexing at this point--there is more rigidity added by the cabin sides, vs the less aft in the cockpit, where there is not the "shear wall" of the cabin. Combine this with the heavy outboard hung on the Armstrong bracket. This is a right angle intersection--with a much stiffer section foreward, and less aft--if the load had been tapered more (ie with a diagnal, it might have made a difference. I'll have to see if the aft cabin bulkhead shows any signs of flexing down low, near the deck.

As far as weight--putting the Radar arch up there is about the same weight, plus it is higher and more likely to "flex". Although the air conditioner is further foreward.
 
Yesterday I had the first sea trial of my brand new (leftover 2007) Tomcat. Based on this thread it was on my mind to inspect closely for the stress cracks, and I found them. Both sides had multiple cracks where the cockpit meets the cabin. Fortunately this issue came to my attention before I took delivery. There is no evidence of uneven gelcoat as far as I can tell and I think they are structural.

Detailed email with pictures and request for repair suggestions forthcoming Bob! :)
 
My cd 22 from 93 has a zillion hours on it in rough conditions and just has really small cracks in the usual spots. I have been pondering buying a newer one, but gosh, I think my boat is better than yours. What is going on?
 
T R,

My 1991 22 cruiser also only had some small gellcoat cracks in the usual places, and I cruised it hard for 15 years.

The old C-Dory factory built the boats slower, with a small experienced crew of boat builders.

Unless you want a larger boat, I would recommend refurbishing/repowering your own boat.
 
I have a CD25 2003 (built July '02), s/n 13. I have several hundred hours on it and have been in extremely rough seas many times, and I have twin engines. So far I can only find two minor gel coat cracks at the top of the transom edges on both sides, they occurred during the first month. You can see them and barely feel them with your fingernail, they are definitely cosmetic.

Maybe it depends on which of the craftsmen worked on your particular boat. I keep watching them, no change, even after some very rough trips.
 
It is entirely possiable that the amount of plywood in the transom was decreased after the first boats and that is the reason that boats about the vintage of mine have the problem with cracking of the corners of the splash well and transom. My CD 25 is #30, built in March 2003. If the plywood core of the transom had gone from one side of the boat to the other, there would have been far better support, and the thrust of the engines taken to the sides of the hull, rather to the splash well only.

Also, although my boat only had 130 hours, I had the feeling that it was run at speed (causing pounding) uch of the time. It is entirely possiable that running slowly or moderate speeds in rough weather is easier on the boat, than running at higher speeds vs the earlier boats being better built.
 
thataway":1kjulnrx said:
It is entirely possiable that the amount of plywood in the transom was decreased after the first boats and that is the reason that boats about the vintage of mine have the problem with cracking of the corners of the splash well and transom. My CD 25 is #30, built in March 2003. If the plywood core of the transom had gone from one side of the boat to the other, there would have been far better support, and the thrust of the engines taken to the sides of the hull, rather to the splash well only.

Also, although my boat only had 130 hours, I had the feeling that it was run at speed (causing pounding) uch of the time. It is entirely possiable that running slowly or moderate speeds in rough weather is easier on the boat, than running at higher speeds vs the earlier boats being better built.
Click to expand...

I find it an extremely troubling thought to think that you spent $50,000 (way more for 25) on a boat that the manufacturer caused all this trouble by saving 10 measly bucks in plywood. Of course, without tearing the darn thing down it is impossible to tell that is what it is. But, something clearly seems wrong.

I am keeping the old boat even though the "new" itch has almost gotten the best of me a couple of times. I guess I will re-power as necessary and keep up on the waxing of the old 93.
 
Bob did a through tear-down, to say the least. I'd say he knows exactly what is wrong and the results are well documented on this site.

Just guessing: but I doubt the manufacturer tried to saved money on plywood. Most likely they could not keep workers that knew what they were doing or were unable to train workers to keep pace with the build schedule.

Mike
 
mikeporterinmd":323bbe1j said:
Bob did a through tear-down, to say the least. I'd say he knows exactly what is wrong and the results are well documented on this site.

Just guessing: but I doubt the manufacturer tried to saved money on plywood. Most likely they could not keep workers that knew what they were doing or were unable to train workers to keep pace with the build schedule.

Mike
Click to expand...

Which is about the same thing, except far worse as this untrained workforce built the whole darn boat. I do hope C-Dory stand behinds their boats for these guys. I have heard that they have been; if you are the original owner of the boat.
 
Larry H wrote:

"The old C-Dory factory built the boats slower, with a small experienced crew of boat builders."

My sentiments exactly! I have never experienced any of the hull or assembly problems we've seen over the past 5-7 years or so.

I can also see the quality lay-up of the hull evident behind the hiding qualities of the Zolatone paint in the cabin and cockpit.

Joe. :teeth :thup
 
Joe: very perceptive re: what lies beneath the interior splatter coat. I've noticed on my new Angler a clear lack of neatness in the FRP tape joints, including some raised areas where the tape was simply not pressed down into the resin and cured with a raised lump and void underneath. This is in direct comparison with my old 1991 Cruiser. These occur mostly at the joints between the separately molded components that are glassed together in final assembly, but are present both inside the cabin and in the cockpit. Now I don't know that this cosmetic sloppiness will cause me any problems, but as a craftsman I've come to believe that sound work almost always has a neat appearance. I'm actually considering having my barrier coat vendor hit the cockpit floor with an additional coat of gelcoat when I take her in next week to have the bottom done, just to make sure that things are completely sealed. Mike.
 
Clearly, these boats are far too expensive to even have to deal with this sort of thing. I know, look at the other boat builders......
 
I think we should continually bash C Dory quality until no one will take an even straight accross the board trade of a C Dory for a Bayliner. I have owned 2 C Dory boats (22' & 25' Cruisers) and have enjoyed the boats very much. I don't see any benefit of bashing C Dory quality on a public forum like this. How does it help? Negative public bashing certainly hurts all C Dory owners and can have an adverse impact on the value of their boats.
 
Like I said, look at the other boat builders. I am saying exactly what you are. While I appreciate that we are discussing C-dory build quality as of late - I would not call it bashing and it is far from it. However, it is concerning and frustrating and everyone knows it is very small percentage of the boats constructed. Tell that to the guys that have one that is spending its early life at the dealer. Like I said, at least the factory is standing behind them and not other builders will even admit a mistake, let alone actually fix something without a huge ordeal. That is what has always set C-Dory apart from the rest. And, that is worth thousands when compared to Bayliner. Heck, they won't even talk to you about a problem. But, they sure will call you fast if you show any interest at all at buying a new one.
 
Wow this thread is a real eye opener!!!. I am thinking twice about purchasing one of these vessel's. I think I'll wait until I can afford a custom aluminum vessel from one of our talented shop's here in B.C. Canada. I don't have time for stress cracks and warranty work. I thought these boat's were bomb proof.
 
Woodduck: appreciate your perspective and brand loyalty, but drilling-down for the truth, TGW information sharing re: how to deal with issues as they come up is one of the more important functions of this site! Several very good C-Dory dealers share these concerns re: falling C-Dory quality and have dropped the C-Dory line as a result. I guess what you're saying is that we should suck it up and stop whining because, with enough complaining, we might alert the boat buying public about flaws in our beloved, cute little boats? "Please sir, may I have another?" I believe that the Factory monitors this site, pays attention to our QC concerns, and responds with functional modifications, warranty coverage, and recall fixes on a regular basis. Diminishing build quality, rather than us telling the truth about it, is the real threat to resale value. The $45K I spent on on my 2nd Dory last Summer entitles me to an opinion, thank you very much!!! Mike.
 
Coal Miner":2v76yyxb said:
Wow this thread is a real eye opener!!!. I am thinking twice about purchasing one of these vessel's. I think I'll wait until I can afford a custom aluminum vessel from one of our talented shop's here in B.C. Canada. I don't have time for stress cracks and warranty work. I thought these boat's were bomb proof.
Click to expand...

For the most part, they are really well built. It is just a very small percentage that are having some problems that I would contribute to corporate growing pains. Don't be misled, your aluminum boat will have some construction issues too. But, will that builder stand behind their product like C-dory does. Maybe. I would never trade my Dory in for a big giant beer can - no offense meant as I love beer:)
 
I didn't mean to fly off the handle and I understand that every boat manufacturer has some "issues" with a few boats. I heard the factory downsized and only kept the experienced boat builders. I wonder if the current boats are being built better with more quality control in mind? I was planning on ordering a brand new 22 angler.
 
Back
Top