Bulding/re-building

[CaseyJones]

Where is the line between re-building a boat and bulding a new one? I see lots of articles and posts about replacing the planking, keel, decks, rib, masts, etc... At what point does the old boat cease to exist?

[Bob Cleek]

An old boat ceases to exist when the old boat owner quits replacing deteriorated pieces. Wood is biodegradable, you see. That answer your question?

[alteran]

Originally posted by Bob Cleek:
An old boat ceases to exist when the old boat owner quits replacing deteriorated pieces. Wood is biodegradable, you see.Lots of biodegrading going on in the back row of boatyards, eh.....
:(

[CaseyJones]

Either Bob didn't understand me, or I don't understand his reply.

My question was how much of an old boat has to remain for it to still be an old boat. If I am doing a renovation, and I have to replace 1/2 the frames, most of the bottom, the decks, and the interior. Do I still have an old boat?

[JimD]

I understood Bob to mean you can replace the entire boat, usually over time, with new parts until none of the original remains and its still the old boat.

[Hughman]

Washington's axe has had the handle replaced 7 times, and the head replaced 4 times. It's still Washington's axe.

[JimD]

Originally posted by Hughman:
Washington's axe has had the handle replaced 7 times, and the head replaced 4 times. It's still Washington's axe.He chopped down more cherry trees than I thought. :D

[Cullen T.M. McGough]

I think Bob answered the question pretty well- for that matter, consider yourself.

Are "you" less "you" every time you spit? Get your hair cut? Have a limb amputated? Donate all your organs?

Where's the line?

I think the answer is largely semantic. A boat ceases to be the original boat, when it is no longer recognizable as the original boat.

If you want to be a stickler about the "rules" (I don't know who came up with this, but these are the "rules" as I've been taught.), you may replace every last stick of wood in a boat, including the keel, as long as the boat maintains it's shape throughout the process.

Most boat owners, however, take great pride in pointing out the "original" bits of their boat, no matter how wretched and ill-considered it might be to keep varnishing some blackened piece of trim.

-Cullen

[BRobinson]

I agree with Mr. McGough 100%. As long as you have something to start with, and by "something" I mean that the average person can tell it was a boat at one time, then it is okay too restore while retaining it's basic shape throughout the process.

[ 01-16-2005, 02:28 AM: Message edited by: BRobinson ]

[Tom M.]

Heehee Bob :D

This is a great illustration of the difference in perspective between amateurs and old pros.

I'm an amateur myself.

[Concordia..41]

Well, if we assume the hull to be a vessel holding the spirit of the craft, then as long as too much of the hull is not opened up at once, then the spirit will remain with, and the work would properly be considered a restoration.

The question then, is how big is the spirit? Now by my way of thinking, and taking a fine SWAG at the problem, I should think that the size of the spirit probably depends a bit on how loved the boat has been. It seems reasonable to assume that a well loved boat would have a spirit so large as to fill all the space within the vessel. Certainly on such a craft one could easily take the garboards and keel out and the spirit would stay firmly wedged within.

The problem is much more complex with a boat that has been treated poorly. Obviously it's self esteem would be at a low, and its spirit shrunk as a consequence. All is not lost, however, if the boat receives comforting attention before the work is started. Lavishing a bit of kindness will cause the boat's spirit to swell with pride, and the work can commence with no fear of loss of spirit.

Now, if that caution isn't taken, then the spirit could easily slip away and be lost. Then the job would be to rebuild, and replace the original spirit with one's own efforts. Ed Harrow, 5/20/02

Restoration vs. Replication Thread (http://media5.hypernet.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=004951)

[Bullet-Nose]

Good question! I’m an old car nut and this subject comes up all time in the hobby. Lots of old iron starts out with a shell, and after a ton of money is spent, is called an antique car...I don’t think so. Or in the case of Hot Rods, an entire car built with new parts, not a true Hot Rod, but a representation of the real thing.

I have the same opinion with old boats (or any other antique) that have 70-90 of the structure replaced. Why not build on a set of plans for an old boat and call it what it is, a representation of an antique.

[paul oman]

The White House has been burned, gutted and rebuilt yet it is still the White House.

Ditto with Michael Jackson's nose, face, chin, etc. - and he now wishes he was someone other than the Michael Jackson pervert - but the courts aren't buying it.

All this probably means is that Michael Jackson won't be welcome in the White House, or that you shouldn't buy an old boat from Michael Jackson!

paul oman
progressive epoxy polymers

[Paulyboy]

Originally posted by paul oman:

All this probably means is that Michael Jackson won't be welcome in the White House, or that you shouldn't buy an old boat from Michael Jackson!

paul oman
progressive epoxy polymersHow about if we build a boat that looks like Michael Jackson and sail it as close to the White house as we can?

[ssor]

When Joshua Slocum rebuilt "Spray" he was compelled to keep the name, because at that time, by his account, the name of the boat stayed the same, regardless of the extent of the rebuild. so I suppose that as long as you don't clear the lot and lay a new keel you're just rebuilding.

[Mike Dawson]

I am a car nut like Bullet-Nose, there is probably no other hobby/business that argues the same question more often.

For instance, old Ferraris.

Ferrari started by building race cars and then started selling them to rich sportsmen to race. A car would be built, raced, modified, engines switched, cars wrecked and rebuilt multiple times in a matter of a few years. What then constitutes an "original" car?

Often a car is restored to a configuration specific to a particular point in it's history although many parts are not "original". The body, in part or in total, may not have been the same one that it left the factory with, the same holds true for the drive train. These parts are consumed by time and use. Usually it is still considered "original".

Sometimes less valuable models are used as "donors" to "recreate" highly sought-after models, usually openly disclosed as "recreations", sometimes not.

Occasionaly nothing more than the serial number plate and a few bits and pieces of a totally destroyed car are metamorphosized into an "original" car.

A perfect unused, as it left the factory, car or boat would obviously be "original" but realistically time and use dictates that parts will be replaced. Most people will accept this as still "original".

In my mind frames, planking, decking etc. are consumables. I think it is more important how the boat is presented. Was it a hulk drug out of the swamp and almost everything replaced at one time and called "original" or were parts replaced, perhaps to the point of most of the parts, a few at a time over the vessels lifespan? The second case I would consider "original". With the first case I would most likely call a "recreation".

Other's opinion may vary.

[Roger Cumming]

In "Restoration of the Smack Emma C. Berry at Mystic Seaport 1969-1971" (Willits D. Ansel), Maynard Bray states in the foreword, "In a lifetime of more than a century, Emma C. Berry had been altered and repaired many times and on each occasion lost some of her original timber. Thus she came to us having only the keel, aft deadwood, traces of frames and possibly the stem and sternpost with which she was built; all else, including the hull planking and decking, was from a later time. A study of paint lines, wear marks, fastening holes, etc., therefore shed little light on how she was initially laid out and constructed.".

From the historical point of view, it is still the Emma C. Berry.

[nedL]

And then there is the whole what is "restoration" vs "rebuild" debate. Our sponsors had a good article on that a couple of years ago. As I remember it was based on a US. parks service interpretation.

[Paulyboy]

In reference to Mike Dawson's post, can we assume that "direct replacement" parts, as opposed to replacing parts with something that would modify it's appearance or purpose, would keep it original? In the car biz, these parts are referred to in such a way, because they're usually replicas made by a different company exclusively for the repair/restoration industry.

[Carl Simmons]

I've also seen a "restoration" where a boat was totally rebuilt but the old keel was temporaily laid in place and then replaced with the new one.

My feeling is that it doesn't really matter as long as the boat coming out of the water goes back in.