PDA

View Full Version : Altering Vintage Boats



MPM
08-28-2012, 11:59 AM
When is it right to alter a classic design?

In WB No. 228 (page 38), which most readers should have received by now, Maria Simpson of Rockport Marine writes about the conversion of GYRE, a vintage 41' Ohlson sloop, from a racer-cruiser to a daysailer. In a sidebar exploring the propriety of altering classic designs, Maria illustrates one end of the classic-yacht spectrum with SPARTAN, the Herreshoff NY 50 that was recently restored to as-new condition. SPARTAN, says Maria "is a piece of yachting history, and owning her comes with a certain responsibility of stewardship." This boat, the logic goes, is clearly one that should be kept as original.

But where is the line? When is it appropriate to alter a classic design, as was done with GYRE? And when is it not appropriate?

(With this thread, we're hoping that readers will offer their own opinions on this, and that we'll be able to present edited excerpts in the next issue's Letters department.)

wizbang 13
08-28-2012, 12:21 PM
How many boats get trashed because folks are enslaved to keeping them authentic?
By "trashed" , I mean , funds or time ran out, not that someone "ruined " a boat with epoxy.
The recent Vertue that was trashed at G n B has me touchy right now.

rbgarr
08-28-2012, 12:35 PM
When is it right to alter a classic design?

In WB No. 228 (page 38), which most readers should have received by now, Maria Simpson of Rockport Marine writes about the conversion of GYRE, a vintage 41' Ohlson sloop, from a racer-cruiser to a daysailer. In a sidebar exploring the propriety of altering classic designs, Maria illustrates one end of the classic-yacht spectrum with SPARTAN, the Herreshoff NY 50 that was recently restored to as-new condition. SPARTAN, says Maria "is a piece of yachting history, and owning her comes with a certain responsibility of stewardship." This boat, the logic goes, is clearly one that should be kept as original.

But where is the line? When is it appropriate to alter a classic design, as was done with GYRE? And when is it not appropriate?

(With this thread, we're hoping that readers will offer their own opinions on this, and that we'll be able to present edited excerpts in the next issue's Letters department.)

Although Gyre might be considered vintage in age, she isn't the only one of her production class. She's pedigreed, well-built, long-lived and a good example of a successful and fast design for her era, but she isn't a unique vessel. I think she was a good choice for the remake, whatever opinions there are of the execution. I would hesitate to alter a one-of-a-kind vessel that has a recognized and widely valued 'provenance', or at least I'd think longer and harder about it. This Herreshoff S-boat, for example is one I personally would feel able to defend altering into, say, an open cockpit version similar in layout to a Buzzards Bay 15. http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?152148-The-s-boat-dream-moves-on It likely wouldn't be popular with the S-boat devotees but any remake I'd plan would be reversible (at a cost certainly) and there are quite a number of S's extant.

Meanwhile, I was especially happy to see Gyre setting Downs sails. Roy Downs isn't appreciated as much as he deserves for his clean craftsmanship, eye for a good cut and informed selection of materials.

BrianM
08-28-2012, 02:38 PM
The premise laid out I find to be improbable.

If a boat has significant historical value, it has significant value in the market which drives any money poured into it in the direction of restoration and not alteration. Look at "Classic Cars" as a template. Every once in a while, someone with piles of money will take a rare car and hot rod/alter it, but the vast majority of truly unique/pristine/rare (or whatever other method of valuation you want to use) cars are either preserved, or restored and valued/traded accordingly. We all know the "market" for wooden boats is microscopic. Only a small fraction of people who own boats bother with wooden boats. A smaller yet fraction of those have had enough interest to understand the place certain boats hold in "history". When one decides to buy a wooden boat, experienced buyers know the mountain of maintenance that comes along and associated expense. How many Herreschoffs have been "hot rodded"/significantly altered for someone's fancy? I'll bet plenty have had their sterns chopped off instead of repaired. The more obvious and inevitable plight of "special" boats is neglect and finally,the chainsaw.


That being said, I've been thinking of doing the same thing to my "Spray" for several years now. My Bill Garden designed boat is a one-off, so to Bill Garden cultists, it might register in their radar, but I doubt that there are Garden "cultists" out there. It's a little cutter setup for 2 people to cross oceans and 4 adults is a big crowd in the cockpit. By stretching the cockpit into the cabin by about 2 or 3 feet, I could easily take 6 or 8 people out for day sailing and there would still be space below to get out of the weather.

A big cockpit would really raise the chances of my boat seeing very regular outings because I have a huge family. My sailing teeth where cut in 30' ex navy "Whaleboats" (open boats which are essentially ALL cockpit) with 20 scouts and guests having a ball sailing/racing across San Francisco Bay.

In the end, it's about using the boats, not looking at 'em

bob winter
08-28-2012, 04:40 PM
The "line" cannot be clearly defined. I found the conversion mentioned above to be mildly disturbing but it can be reversed (almost anything can be if you are willing to spend enough) and it did not really detract from the appearance of the boat. At the same time, it made the boat more useful for the owner.

Boats are a lot like houses. Both require ongoing maintenance to keep them functional and changes from the original are bound to happen. Does anybody care if a boat has the original engine? It is an important consideration with a classic car but not so much with a boat.

Hwyl
08-30-2012, 04:47 PM
I agree "Let the market decide" although Gyre is a strange choice and some of her conversion features odd.

There was a great editorial in Classic boat (it may have been by Nic Compton) comparing classic boats built and designed by the master craftsmen such as Fife and Herreshoff, to works of art by their contemporaries such as Picasso. He argued that the boats were essentially fine works of art and should be valued accordingly .

I see his point and whilst provenanced boats do command a premium, they are still within the bounds of usable art, which pleases me;but I digress.

My thought is that owners can do whatever they want and we must live with that, although I did witness a burly schoonerman moved to tears over some of the changes to Victory Chimes during here Dominoes days.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
08-30-2012, 09:48 PM
Sadly, within the family of 'vintage' wooden boats, there are subsets. I find Woodenboat magazine concerns itself mostly with builders with small production, or designer/builders of larger boats when it comes to the subject of vintage or antique.

A great number of production builders in North America are generally ignored.... Chris Craft, Century, Owens, Trojan, and a host of others. A lot of the larger boats from these builders, (larger being over 30 feet) have experienced a substantive decline in numbers, simply because of their perceived ordinary nature, and the cost of restoration. Ultimately, this means that these boats become more rare, and perhaps more valuable, but probably just rare.

I have some experience with vintage cars. If you modify a vintage car from it's original state, it becomes a rod, or a restomod, or a custom. While it may appeal to some, the definition of the vehicle has changed. I have no issue with modifications of vintage boats or cars, but one cannot then claim that this is the 'preservation' or a 'stewardship' of the vintage object. The object has changed from what it was into something different. It is no longer the original item.

The fine line, in my opinion, is more easily understood. The original layout of the boat must be maintained. The hull material, shape, rig, and propulsion, where possible should be maintained. The engine issue in vintage boats is a curious one. A great deal of incorrect rebuilds are done on high powered vintage motors, yet they retain their score for judging purposes. A boat can be repowered, and apparently this is also permissible when considering it as a vintage object. I find there is some argument in this decision, since vintage propulsion can speak to a great part of what the boat might have been, however, this is indeed the fine line. I can understand the use of modern materials, such as adhesives, paints, coatings and electrical devices and wiring. These reduce maintenance, look extremely similiar, and in the case of electrical and appliances, can be safe yet cosmetically minor changes to the boat. Furniture, fabrics, paint schemes and colors, should be in keeping with the vintage of the boat.

Stewardship means preserving what was, not creating a personal vision of what you think the original designer or builder intended. They already have shown you what they intended. Understandably, we need to adapt some things to continue to make them risk free, and useable even for their original purpose, but care must be taken. What we view as history is sometimes an individual thing, but all of us need to be aware of how history and archival preservation have some universal standards. It isn't just about pictures of what a boat used to look like, it needs to be there in front of us. If someone wants a modern boat, buy a modern boat.

In the end, this is why there ends up to be only a few, treasured, admired and preserved 'original' versions of a boat, or a car, or even a chair or lamp. This is also the reason why these few become less available, less known and certainly less used. If we all looked carefully at 'old' things, and thought about the why and how and where and when of them, we might be better stewards. It isn't about us, and it never was. It's about the Mona Lisa. We don't need to understand, we just need to respect and observe, and keep the museum doors open so everyone can see her.

Garret
08-30-2012, 10:07 PM
While this is the first time I've ever had an opinion, I'll toss one out.... :)

As the owner of a 70 year old custom boat that seems to be pretty well known in the PNW (though by no means a Bolero or Stormy Weather!), I have been very careful to not modify her extensively. Modern wiring, engine, etc. I see no problem with. I know Norm Blanchard (the builder) was on board her in the mid 90's & commented that the former owner was being silly to have nothing but 3 strand lines. "I'd sure use braided jib sheets!". So - I think improvements like that (& systems) make complete sense.

I had a bigger dilemma though. I'm 6'5" & the berths are all 6'3" - while the headroom is 6'5". If you have never slept in a berth that is shorter than you, count your blessings - it's no fun. What I did was to carefully remove the V berths - keeping them 100% intact and damaged as little as possible. We then replaced them with an athwartships double berth - that is 7' at the short end. This makes the boat far more usable for me, but a purist or someone who prefers V berths could put her back to what she was fairly easily.

With a production boat, I feel that keeping the boat in use & in good condition is far more important than keeping it 100% original. Would I rather see a well loved/used/cared for modified boat over a boatyard derelict? I think you know the answer.

That being said, any mods should be carefully thought out & made reversible if at all possible.

Woxbox
08-30-2012, 10:22 PM
I, too, cringe whenever I see a fine old boat adulterated in any way. But I've got to say also that I don't have much patience with people who would dictate what ought to be done with boats they don't own. Owning a boat means it's yours, and you can do whatever you like with it. The preservation-minded should stop whining and donate cash to museums and other organizations that are in a position to buy up the treasures that they want to be preserved.

BrianM
08-31-2012, 10:41 AM
I, too, cringe whenever I see a fine old boat adulterated in any way. But I've got to say also that I don't have much patience with people who would dictate what ought to be done with boats they don't own. Owning a boat means it's yours, and you can do whatever you like with it. The preservation-minded should stop whining and donate cash to museums and other organizations that are in a position to buy up the treasures that they want to be preserved.

Y> Perfect ! BY:D

Canoeyawl
08-31-2012, 12:10 PM
When is it right to alter a classic design?

(With this thread, we're hoping that readers will offer their own opinions on this, and that we'll be able to present edited excerpts in the next issue's Letters department.)

I think we should clarify whether the discussion is about an existing boat, or a design.

My perspective, if we are discussing a vessel, and it not in possesion of a publicly funded institution one can do whatever they want with it. If it is in a museum collection then conservation should be primary. The artifact has a story to tell, and that can be easily lost or changed. Conservation techniques should be reversible.
Mostly this is a tempest in a teacup unless we are talking about a vessel that that may provide insight about the advance or decline of civilisation.

MPM
08-31-2012, 03:31 PM
Thanks, canoeyawl. To be clear: We're talking about actual boats, and not designs, in this particular discussion. Your point regarding public trust vs. private ownership is a good one, but I suppose the question becomes more nuanced when we consider boats that are in private hands yet are rare artifacts—as some paintings are. Do the owners of those paintings (or boats) have conservation obligations?

rbgarr
08-31-2012, 04:28 PM
Matt,

Can you clear up a point here? Paintings, in your analogy, are each by definition unique. By rare boats do you mean those that are likewise strictly one of a kind, entirely original as found? If so, the word to describe them would be something other than vintage, I think.

James McMullen
08-31-2012, 04:51 PM
I'd rather a boat get used and loved than kept in a museum. Unless its really, really unique or historic, I guess. But honestly, how many of those are there really? I don't think Gokstad or Victory ought to have flying bridges and new lexan port lights installed, but someone who want to take the engines out of an old Chriscraft and put in a modern electric hybrid drive or something is just fine with me.

Ron Williamson
08-31-2012, 05:48 PM
A new decent powerplant isn't a bad thing.
Kinda like a new hip for your granny.

If you are the custodian of a historic one-of-a-kind,you have a responsibility to do right by it.
If you can't,you should sell it and get something that is closer to your needs.

Otherwise,it's just a boat and you should be able to do whatever the hell you want, without guilt.
R

kbowen
08-31-2012, 11:05 PM
Wherever the line is, the thing that Dennis Conner did to "Fame" is clearly a giant step over. (p 85 in the same WB issue) imho, this is a guy attempting to purchase class, but who can't abide not to win a race even if it means putting carbon fiber sails on a pedigreed Crowinshield classic, (need we mention his "tacks" into the courtroom?) . This is a boat that was designed as a day sailor that could be single-handed and Conner piled a crew of 8+ on it and sent out a YouTube of him holding court on just how he was going to win the race-du-jour. I don't think this boat should be raced competitively, regardless of the rebuild. I understand that it was sailed under in a race on the lakes with a previous owner. Conner clearly has the funds to treat this boat like the classic it is, but he is not doing so. I fault the yachting community for the fawning deference they have given this "adaptation" ... just the opinion of one sailor....

michigangeorge
09-01-2012, 06:28 AM
I'm in basic agreement with kbowen above but see no reason not to race her with her original rig. The as-designed rig was not only easier to sail but more attractive as well. What she gives up to windward may well be regained off wind given less weight of crew and the inevitable screw-ups that occur with the more complex rig if racing with weekend sailors of normal skills (likely not so many mistakes w Conner's crew).

outofthenorm
09-01-2012, 01:18 PM
My view is that preservation is a matter of respect. Respect for original materials, quality workmanship and, so far as can be determined, intended purpose. The "line" is usually easy to define. In the case of Fame, I think it was crossed: the new boat is almost unrecognizable as having come from the old.

In my case, Fiddlers Green (like Fame) is actually a one-of-a-kind - the only gaff-rigged T. Harrison Butler Englyn in existence. That creates, at least in me, a sense of responsibility.

I undertook the recent long overhaul with the intention of giving her a second 50 years of life without altering anything basic to her character or performance, simply because the previous 30 years of living with her had given me respect for what she was and is. She works as a cruiser, her performance is satisfying and rewarding, and I think she is a treat for the senses. Changes were limited, and a mix of approaches were taken: Any degraded material (wood, cloth or metal) was replaced with the highest quality I could acquire and afford; her original fastenings were galvanized, so I took some trouble to find and use high quality galvanized bolts, lags and screws where needed below the sheer, but used stainless steel above; when re-bedding anything, I upgraded to modern sealants; the original electrical wiring was entirely replaced with modern gear; cabin lights were re-used, but I replaced all the internals with LEDs; sail-covers and cabin upholstery were made from Sunbrella, not canvas and wool as original; the gas engine was overhauled and re-installed, but I added drip pans, increased the strength of the beds and switched to electronic ignition.

During the next year, I will replace most of the braid running and standing rig (she has deadeyes and lanyards) with modern 3-strand, likely POSH. Sheets will still be braid. The original rig remains unchanged, but I am planning to add a bunch of light weather sails: A jackyard topsail, a big light-weight jib topsail, and a ringtail for the main. I feel that my approach, in which I tried to create a balance of respect, safety and convenience, was vindicated when someone who knows the boat commented that after 9 years of work, she looks pretty much as she did before - but doesn't leak.

- Norm

Garret
09-01-2012, 02:03 PM
Norm -

Precisely my approach towards Neoga. Oh, I went with diesel, but only because I had to replace the engine (which was already non-original) & there have been some changes former owners have made that I've undone, but your "balance of respect, safety and convenience" makes all kinds of sense to me. For example, the anchor roller I added is presumed to be original by most people, but I could change the boat back to her original setup in a couple of hours.

I also agree about Fame. I would, in fact, go a bit further & say the line was definitely crossed. I view my time with Neoga as stewardship more than ownership, just as I try to treat the land I live on with respect.

kbowen
09-01-2012, 06:10 PM
I'm in basic agreement but see no reason not to race her with her original rig. .

I am not inherently opposed to racing, I have really appreciated races where crews have used the opportunity to put down their beers and focus on excellent seamanship and sail handling, and the question of winning against another dissimilar boat was secondary. I have a very special fondness for the memories of walking the docks at the end of the Mackinaw race in the late 50's and early 60's where the harbor was full of mahogany and bronze, and many people acknowledged that the "winner" as determined ultimately by the rating rule was not the sole determinate of having sailed a good race. In this framework, I think Fame could and should be raced with her original rig and I would be delighted to be within binocular range. I am much more cautious of the new "spirit of tradition" class in which it appears that the hard-boiled racing mentality is looking for ways to fit the official definition, "spirit" be-damned.

Duncan Gibbs
09-11-2012, 07:50 PM
I'm in the interesting position of owning one of the original Dragons in Australia, built in 1962. I'm in contact with the son of the builder, who also helped his father build her. He is an IDA measurer as well. \

I guess my choice is rather simpler since I want my yacht to pass muster to be re-registered on the IDA books. At the same time I want to take what is essentially a shell of what my boat once was back to the original plans as drawn by Anker for a fully enclosed cabin. This will allow me to use the boat far more than a standard open cabin plan, as we have a bar crossing at the Tweed River. Salt water washing is the best way to prevent a garden growing on the bottom and rot occurring topsides. The planking is tight seamed, but the builder's son agrees that splining is the best thing to do in her case.

I think compromises and upgrades are always required. A yacht is not like a painting insofar as a yacht is a functional object with aesthetic qualities and a painting is an aesthetic object with no 'functional' qualities. The only case for pure preservation would be as a static museum piece. OTOH what Conner did to Fame was beyond the pale. Haven't seen the new WB yet so I can't comment on the boat in the OP.

purri
09-12-2012, 02:25 AM
As some have posted or inferred the issue is "with sympathy to the original form and intent".

Jazzman
09-12-2012, 07:36 AM
I wonder how original is anything that has been raced. Old bikes, cars, speed boats, sail boats etc. Racers change stuff a lot, like every season!
I will question changing engines in classic boats. Do what you want, it's your boat, however the charm of vintage machinery is often largely due to the powerplant. I have vintage motorcycles, and whilst the engine is much more of a visual presence than inside a boat or car, I can still dig an old side valve, or big single cylinder putt putt, or old diesel, running well in any vehicle. That's why people love the steam launches at boat regattas. ( yes, the far end of the spectrum, I know).
What I mean is, don't be too quick to junk your old engine. There are often many people out there with a fond regard for "the old stuff", and you'd be surprised how easy and not so expensive it is to keep your old banger going. My 1928 Indian is going together with good condition old parts, and very reasonably priced (cheaper than Honda) beautifully made American repop parts.
Sorry to drift off the converting of sailboats thing, but I thought it was relevant.

Canoeyawl
09-12-2012, 12:24 PM
Paintings (as a notable example of art) are done by one person. A boat or specifically a yacht is a composition of several people and does not hold the allure for most of the public that a work by an established artist does. It is a much smaller market, and the product itself requires skilled and often cost prohibitive storage, care and maintenance.
The boat designer can create a truly beautiful work on paper but if the owner and the builder are not educated to the same esthetic standards it will be a failure.

Because the builder is generally working for a patron and not the artist, it is a rare combination of people that produce collectable art per-se.
Often you see this successful combination in small craft when the design is created and built by the same person, or the builder has knowledge of exactly what the designer wanted, and this is subjective. The process is fraught with danger just in the initial interpretation of a three dimensional object from paper. In other words; is he, the repairman, or builder skilled enough to see down to the last detail why the original craft was designed or built the way it was? There is much to be left to interpretation with most plans and often the esthetic is lost because of this.

If it was possible for the designer to control all the aspects of the project then I suspect the boat would be of note and demand respect. (Aage Nielsen and Nathaniel Herreshoff are good examples of rigid control over the finished product and the prices of their vessels reflect this.)
It always seems to be a question of money. Boats are essentially utilitarian objects and in the course of normal use they can be damaged or just deteriorate over time. The person responsible for repairing these ravages of time and use (another "patron") has to make a financial decision that often cannot consider much of the original fabric. The first example might be that finding that the materials common when the vessel was built are no longer readily available becomes the first compromise.
(Of course they are available, but not at a cost, either in time for hand crafted components or materials that would justify, to most, subjecting the craft to the elements and the general stupidity of men. You are simply not going to keep your Van Gough in a marina).

Duncan Gibbs
09-12-2012, 07:21 PM
This is why I find the job Conner did on Fame to be somewhat repellent. Here's a Crowninshield design, built for Crowninshield and Conner's just gone and added crap like a complicated rig and other junk, when the original was really quite a spartan boat. I suppose it can be undone. The work that Mr Brookes did on Rawhiti OTOH is completely brilliant and, as Purri says, "with sympathy to the original form and intent".

alan e
09-16-2012, 05:01 PM
I do not own a boat, least of all a fine one of classic design or pedigree, and there for have a scant edge to stand on. having said that, I would be very judicious in altering it. Massive changes in rig, superstructer or even cabin layout shoud IMO, not really be done. Chopping the cabin on GEYRE to enlarge the cockpit is hopefully reversible bit of , well butchery. If this man wanted a day sailer, why did he not just sell the boat and get a production boat that firt his needs? It is his boat, granted, and the changes seemed well done, but was it really nessesary? I can see some upgrades such as engine, electronics and such, if tastefully done to be nessesary to keep the boat going on to tomorrow but the degree alternation on this vessel just does not seem right to me. Just the opinion of one who loves boats, tho he does not have the privelege of owning one.

Golondrina
09-16-2012, 06:48 PM
The question "When is it right to alter a classic design?" is a rather slippery one and many of the above posts have fairly addressed the question. Rather than repeat some of the comments, I though I'd make some observations about the Concordia Yawls, since they were mentioned in the sidebar.
The original Concordia Yawl was never designed to be a "classic" nor was she or her sisters ever built to last as long as they have. Why they've lasted is a question for another time but the fleet has had the mantle of "classic" draped over each boat.
So if we decide, for the sake of argument, not to alter this classic, where is the standard from which we should not deviate? Java, hull one? No, since Java and the other three American built hulls were drawn to a slightly different set of lines than the 99 Abeking & Rasmussen hulls. Furthermore, does anyone know the built length of Java's mast? The dimensions from the drawing? Or was the mast built to a different length? Photos of the era raise is question since they seem to indicate a mast that is a bit different from the drawing.
Speaking of masts, once A&R started production on the yawl, Fenwick Williams, in 1954, drew up a standard rig plan for the 39s that A&R followed, but then Waldo and Ray and some owners cut the tops off many of these masts - sometimes more than once - so they would rate better when they started racing. (There was a pile, stacked not unlike cordwood, I'm told, of all these cut-off tops under a bench in the Concordia carpentry shop.) So where's this standard?
Tom Kiley's family boat, Belles, was far from the only one raced for a year or more as a sloop. Many were. Harrier was even raced for once season as a cat boat.
I think the Concordias were treated more like a "box rule" one design in the '50s and '60s. There was only one 39 hull form, one interior layout but numerous rig configurations. There were two 41 hull forms, also with a wide variety of rig configurations as well as at least eight interior options. And then the rigs were modified over and over when the boats raced. But no standard. We jokingly recite our mantra "Abeking & Rasmussen made 99 identical Concordias. Each one is different."
It wasn't until they ceased to be competitive on the race course and became desirable as cruising boats that they become classics. We must give credit to Elizabeth Meyer's wonderful book, "Concordia Yawls: The First Fifty Years," for really laying the mantle of "classic" on the fleet. In the 25 years since the book's publication, most owners have attempted to keep their boats in the configuration of that late '80s era.
My own personal standard is that I will not "alter" the interior (well... except for replacing the alcohol stove and the flushing head and the forward pipe berths and...) but I will modernize all the electrical, mechanical and electronic systems. I will not change the spars or the configuration of the standing rigging, but I will use the best modern low stretch poly (I won't go to the laminates) sail material and no stretch synthetic running rigging for the halyards. Nor will I deviate from the original Concordia "standard" colors.
Every time I ponder some alteration, I always ask myself "What would Waldo do?" or "What would Ray do?" Waldo, the Quaker from a traditional New England seafaring family, would probably not deviate far from the original plans. Ray, on the other hand, would embrace any alterations that made the boat sail safer or better or faster. So Waldo has kept my interior as original as can be while Ray would probably push me to make greater changes in the sails and rig. Waldo and Ray have given me, and my 101 fellow owners, permission to make changes as long as those changes do not destroy the boat but rather contribute to her continued long sailing life.

johngsandusky
10-11-2012, 12:59 PM
A good thread. I just finished the article on sheathing Carib II and expected some outrage about that. I'm glad to see that the posts have been practical and respectful.

rbgarr
10-11-2012, 02:38 PM
Golondrina,

Regarding Concordias I believe your rules to keep to the same colors and most of the interior and cockpit layout is about right (fwiw). If you were to change the portholes and hatches to modern ones I think it might be a mistake. The as-designed features like that, though they may have been altered a bit in size or shape and improved over time are part of what make a Concordia 'recognizable' as a classic and have lessons for anyone who studies them. Howland's book has wonderful drawings of them and a brief write-up on the Concordia (Baeteka) prams. As far as the rig is concerned, taller (painted) carbon spars like Jon Wilson put on his Concordia 33 are okay by me.

I'm pretty sure the Kiley's Concordia was named Belle One when they owned her, and was renamed Eight Belles and finally Belles under subsequent owners.

Duncan Gibbs
12-21-2012, 07:33 AM
Just picked up 229 and noticed a few of us have been quoted. Coulda knocked me down with a feather!