Looking at buying a triton, questions.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:50 pm

Hi guys,

Looking at one that I don't know the year of. The # plate is missing.
Wondering if there is another location that Pearson put this.

Will I need to have the # for when I get the boat documented? Or will the title info suffice? (I'm assuming that the triton is big enough to document based on the ones that are out cruising!)

I'd also be really appreciative if I could get some coaching as to what to look for on this thing that is triton specific... the hard to replace, or common problems!

Thanks guys!

Zach

Post by **Tim** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 7:35 am

Tritons were built before there were any silly, bureaucratic requirements for 12-digit hull numbers to better fill file cabinets. Therefore, there are not any particular locations where you will find the hull number on the boat, since there were likewise no requirements to place the number in one or more locations. (Today, builders are required to indelibly place hull numbers in at least two places--on the transom, and in a "hidden" location elsewhere on the boat.)

However, some Tritons have numbers scrawled in irregular places, though there's nothing official about these if you should find them. Still, it might give you an idea as to the hull number of your boat. People have found numbers stamped into the mast support beam, on bulkheads, and inside lockers. Take a look, but don't expect to find anything.

The mainsail might have a number, though of course there's no guarantee that it's the right number, since someone might have bought a mainsail from another Triton owner. But generally this is a fair clue as to your hull number.

Documentation doesn't require a hull number beyond whatever necessity for official numbers there is for clear title paperwork, but you'll want a year of build. Most states require the standard long hull number for their registration paperwork, though. Since no Triton ever had this number issued at the time of build, most states will make one up and issue it to the boat, sometimes for a fee. I find this requirement silly, annoying, and pointless, but there you have it. If your state requires this, then use the state-issued "hull number" for all future paperwork needs.

If there's existing title information (i.e paperwork), use whatever year is there. You can document a Triton, but you'll need a chain of clear title to do so: at a minimum, you need to not only prove you bought the boat (with a USCG 1341 notarized bill of sale), but you need to be able to show that the person you bought the boat from owned her clearly--which means that there needs to be evidence that he bought her from someone else, such as an older bill of sale, or state-issued title paperwork if available. Or a previous USCG documentation. Clear title (an abstract quality, BTW) can take many forms, but the point is that you need a paperwork trail of the boat's ownership back through one, and preferably two, previous owners.

Be sure you have the proper clear title information before you submit your documentation paperwork and filing fee, because if you don't have proper title information going back through at least the previous owner, the Coast Guard won't issue a documentation, and won't refund your fee either.

Zach wrote:I'd also be really appreciative if I could get some coaching as to what to look for on this thing that is triton specific... the hard to replace, or common problems!

Forget about generalities related to what might or might not be wrong with the Triton you're looking at. Instead, inspect--and have inspected--this specific boat to determine her own specific pros and cons and issues. Tritons don't have any particular issues that you won't also find in other boats, and what issues Tritons do have vary widely from boat to boat, and are clearly evident when they exist. So look critically at this boat to determine what makes her good, and what makes her bad, and feel free to ask questions about specific issues that you find. I feel that there's virtually nothing unfixable on a Triton, but whether the boat is fairly priced based on her true condition, and whether you are willing and prepared to undertake what work might be required, are more likely to become issues for your eventual purchase.

Good luck!

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:01 pm

Thanks Tim!

Great info.

I recently learned that the boat sunk a couple owners ago... wondering how bad that will be for the bulkheads and deck cores.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:39 pm

It may depend on how long she was down.

My boat "mostly sunk" under previous ownership. I gather that she was raised and pumped out within a week. When I replaced rotten bulkheads it was evident that the rot was due to deck leaks, not the submersion.

Post by **Tim** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:27 am

Zach wrote:I recently learned that the boat sunk a couple owners ago... wondering how bad that will be for the bulkheads and deck cores.

It's probably less bad for the structure than it is for everything else on the boat.

But it if happened some time ago, the ramifications should have already manifested themselves, so you can assess what, if any, damage remains as a result.

You'll never know whether any existing deck core problems were created or exacerbated by the sinking, but what matters now is whether, and to what extent, they do exist, and how or whether you plan to go about repairing them, if needed.

Bulkheads shouldn't be particularly affected by a short-time submersion, but knowing in advance that the boat sank a while ago, you can be better informed to more carefully inspect everything. Forewarned is forearmed.

Good luck. We like pictures, if you're so inclined!

Post by **dasein668** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:02 am

Tim wrote:We like pictures, if you're so inclined!

Ooo! OOOO! Pictures! ::slobber slobber::

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:29 pm

Well... Just got off the phone with the surveyor.

Says that theres not a surface on it that would be acceptable to a normal human and the inside is one of the more filthy that he has seen...

The deck is mushy, the sails are shot, mast is squishing down the deck... etc. I'm disappointed, figure a wise man would leave it to someone else... but I'll be darned if part of me doesnt want to fix her up.

Thoughts?

Jason K · Post by **Jason K** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:36 pm

It depends on what you want to do with the boat. The core issue is common on Tritons as is the failing mast compression beam.

Do you want a project or are you looking for a boat that is ready to go sailing? If you think you might like a project, be very, very honest with yourself about the time and money involved and have at it.

If you don't, then there are a lot of boats out there. Including other Tritons.

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:59 pm

At least the surveyor told it like it is! That's much more useful than a "full" report of how many boathooks are on the boat, exhaustive detail about the model numbers of obsolete electronics, and that sort of thing.

I agree with the previous responses: Ask yourself what you really want, and if the answer is "a great big, time-consuming project" then you may have found your boat.

We'll want pics throughout, of course :-)

Rachel

Post by **Tim** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:18 pm

Yup. Like the others have said, be honest with yourself about what you are looking for, what projects you WANT to and CAN realistically accomplish, how much TIME you have (most important!!!), how much you can and are willing to spend on repairs, upgrades, and so forth.

Project boats, for those who enjoy the process and can take the time and have the reasonably-priced storage space available and either have other means of getting on the water or don't care, can be great fun. But don't get into it thinking it will save you money, or be over with in a short time. Things cost money, and frankly it's not worth doing anything on the cheap; you always pay in the end.

Now, about this specific boat, or at least what we know about it:

Dirt and filth succumb with relative ease to a dedicated bout of elbow grease. Nastiness can disappear within the matter of a days' work, if you're so inclined. I'd call most Tritons for sale that I've been on "filthy" and "not acceptable to a normal human", but that's just cosmetic stuff. Project boats start out nasty, so that's par for the course. Maybe this surveyor is more used to gold platers, so was a bit taken aback by this boat.

Deck compression around the mast step and/or mast beam compression (flattening of the arch) are common features on Tritons. As repairs go, this is quite easy.

Sails...well, new sails are expensive, but sails can be replaced. Just don't pay up front for junk (in terms of the boat's purchase price).

Fixing up these old boats is a worthy notion, but most projects end in non-completion. So look long and hard at yourself, your budget, your time, your family (as applicable), your other commitments, your job, and so forth, and be sure you can handle what is coming up if you buy this, or any, project boat.

There are lots of Tritons out there. Many need complete rebuilds, but many don't either. The rebuilding/project part is fun if you want to personalize and upgrade a boat to your (hopefully high) standards, but if this isn't something you care about, then keep looking till you find a boat in condition more ready to sail away.

Have any more pictures? We're hungry! (And irrepressible...and maybe even a little annoying about it! hehe)

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:29 pm

More pictures:

Sounds like it has a core repair on one of the side decks that was done from the inside... which I don't have a picture of. Also don't have a picture of the floor.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:43 pm

My goal with the boat was/is to turn it into something sea worthy for cruising. I don't have much money to do it (College student) but the triton seems like the right size, and design for rougher stuff. Rigging and ground tackle can be overkilled without spending a ton, etc.

Havent decided if floating around the caribbean would be the most it would ever do... but the strength of the design and folkboat lineage doesnt seem to have much trouble with oceans!

I've got about ten grand that could go to the boat fund, but the cruising kitty would zero out at that point. I think it could be done for less, but to get it looking ship shape it'd take a lot more. The problem lies with my being 250 miles from the water, easy enough to solve once the interior is fit for human habitation.

Jason K · Post by **Jason K** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:10 pm

You can get a very nice Triton for $10,000. You can get a good Triton for $5000 to $6000. I know it sounds low, but that's a reality for these boats.

For reference, I sold my boat for $3500. The foredeck needed to be recored, the topsides needed paint, the bottom needed paint, the cushions were rough, and the running rigging needed replacement.

The motor ran, the interior and decks were freshly painted, electronics (batteries, radios, etc) were new (ish) and the brightwork was in good shape. I had a good main, a good jib, and a fair spinnaker. The genoa was in poor shape.

I bought the boat for $2500 and I have no idea how much I put into it. I would guess about $5000, including the cost of some tools. To me, it was worth every penny as I had a GREAT time with the boat and it was very catalytic for getting back into sailing in a major way (I did very little sailing in college...I think).

I believe that, if your budget is limited, you should spend as much as you can afford on the nicest boat you can get. The repairs are fun and invaluable when it comes to learning about your boat, but they are rarely economical.

On a boat like the Triton, where part of the appeal is the low cost of entry, it's a rare owner that comes close to recouping the many dollars it takes to bring a project boat to a point where it's "fit for a human." Your dollars will go farther if a buy a boat whose major systems and components have already been upgraded.

Post by **Tim** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:23 pm

OK, so that Triton is no gem, but she doesn't look that bad. I think the surveyor may be a bit of a Prima Donna (or else I'm just way too used to Tritons). On the surface, things could clean up pretty easily and be at least remotely liveable for a tough college student.

You can go through $10,000 like nothing. Be careful. If that's truly your budget, including buying the boat and leaving some reserve for a cruising kitty, then you won't be able to do much beyond the sheer basics. Doing work yourself saves money, of course, but materials can get expensive.

I'm sure you're willing to make do with a lot of the status quo, after cleaning things up. So you can concentrate on the critical things: keeping water out of the boat (through hulls and hoses, as required, and any deck leaks), staying safe (lifelines, secure stanchions, safe and secure rigging), and sailing (upgrades to the sails and running rigging as required).

Obviously, this represents only the tip of the iceberg. You can spend as much as you have and more, and to truly make this a great boat you'd go over your budget without question.

On the plus side, I see a quite new electrical panel with some acceptably decent-looking new wiring attached. What's the engine situation? Atomic 4 in running condition, or something worse?

Have you seen the boat in person? If not, you need to before making any decisions. This boat could be OK if you decide that you can live with most everything the way it is (cleaned up), if the sails are at least usable, and if the price is low.

Finally, what's the asking price? Jason makes some good points about the costs, but the photos here show a boat that's really not in that bad condition, or certainly not as bad as Chicken Little the surveyor made things sound. I was expecting a much more disgusting interior, frankly. But there are still a lot of outstanding question marks here.

It's still not possible to say whether this is the boat for you or not. I hope you are getting more from your surveyor than the quotes above, because you really need some solid information on the boat's structure and systems. If you paid for a full survey, be sure you get it.

Post by **Tim** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:28 pm

And a few clues as to the age of this boat:

She's older because she has the old-style bronze opening ports with the four mounting screws and single dog. This points to a hull number roughly in the 100-mid 200s-ish range.

She has factory top-opening cockpit lockers. This would tend to put the hull number at the high end of the scale above.

She has the second generation deck mold with the molded taffrail scuppers.

There's no liner in the main saloon. I don't know when the liners started, but somewhere before the 300s.

Offhand, I'd put her hull number somewhere either side of 200.

Jason K · Post by **Jason K** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:30 pm

the photos here show a boat that's really not in that bad condition, or certainly not as bad as Chicken Little the surveyor made things sound. I was expecting a much more disgusting interior, frankly. But there are still a lot of outstanding question marks here.

I agree, I think the surveyor's comments were a little rough. While pictures often hide a lot of defects, the boat appears to be quite serviceable. I see they even copied Tim's idea (more flattery!) for PVC rocket launchers.

Seriously, depending on what they are asking for the boat, it would appear you could be cruising in reasonably short order. You can certainly take the safety first, cosmetics later approach. Just consider the cost of your best alternative and make a decision.

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:34 pm

I, too, was expecting worse. It looks like someone took an interest at some point, and made some not-to-bad mods to the galley. I don't know how familiar you are with Tritons, but the original icebox has been removed and replaced by a cooler (not that that's necessarily bad - many people remove them in favor of a cooler, a better icebox, or something like an Engel refrigerator).

I wonder about the engine: The surround looks higher than usual - has a larger diesel been fitted? Or?

If you haven't seen very many Tritons, you might want to look over Yachtworld (although it's not the place for deals, normally, there are good photos), and also at the various photos (and information) on the National Triton Association or New England Triton Association websites.

Did you mention your location? There's Pleione for sale in New England that might be a contender, if you pass up this boat. There was also a link to a nice looking boat on Craigslist in Virginia, but that seems to have been sold (ad is gone).

Tim's right - seeing the boat in person would tell you a lot.

Good luck, and keep us posted! :-)

Rachel

Hirilondë · Post by **Hirilondë** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:56 pm

Tim wrote:Fixing up these old boats is a worthy notion, but most projects end in non-completion.

I have no doubt what-so-ever in the accuracy of this statement.

I work in a boatyard and my boss told me last summer I was the first employee in 20 years to actually "finish" a project boat though 7 or 8 predecessors started one. You have to really want to do a project boat to have any hope of maintaining the endurance to finish. It is not for the light hearted. I spent 800 hours the first 8 months getting my Renegade day sail ready for my first season. I spent another 400 hours this past winter getting it ready to cruise this season.

It can be a very rewarding endeavor, but one needs to be realistic in evaluating one's resources: money, skills, work space, assistance, family support/encouragement, time, etc.. And of course you must be prepared to take many pictures on a regular basis and post them here with detailed commentary.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:52 pm

Sounds like its worth going up to take a look.
Guessing it's worth the out of water survey (20 bucks a foot in this case... ouch) to see whats its got down below.

I'm fairly confident that skills wise I can take on most anything with enough tries... and have a finished product thats decent... but it'll take some priority shifts to make that happen. (Doing a frame off resto on a car at the moment, that I've got to finish and sell off.)

Thanks guys for the thoughts...

Zach

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:26 pm

Zach,

If you do complete car restorations, you've probably got a decent idea of what you'd be getting into with a project boat.

I mentioned the National Triton Association earlier; I just popped in to take a look at their classifieds, and there's a potentially nice sounding, cheapish Triton listed in Michigan. I'm not sure where you are, of course, so it might not be a contender, but it looks interesting. (I hope it's not a problem to reprint the ad here):

Location: Port Huron, Michigan
Comments: Triton #115 for sale. Built in Rhode Island 1960. Atomic 4 engine. complete professional tune-up 2006. Mast and boom have been up-graded. Main, genoa and several other head sails plus spinnaker all serviceable. Boat is in the water at the Port Huron Yacht Club west basin ready to go. Has external ballast. No spongy spots in deck. Double side stays. Asking $3500 or B/O. 517-676-1557.

The NTA classified section can be found here:

http://tinyurl.com/2mze6s

FloatingMoneyPit · Post by **FloatingMoneyPit** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:46 pm

Wow, I too expected much worse. God knows my T27 was in much rougher shape when I bought it.
If the boat is ok below the waterline and the engine runs reasonably well, I'd suggest you're in for some elbow grease, a re-core, standing rigging upgrade, and used sail shopping to get "out there". If you can control the very recalcitrant "what the boat wants, the boat gets" urges, you don't have to spend big bucks beyond these items. I saw a lot of happy cruisers on budget boats in the Bahamas that had solid re-cores but quick-n-dirty paint jobs, well worn sails, painted pine where varnished teak trim would normally be, a simple canvas tarp instead of dodger & bimini, an old boombox instead of a proper marine stereo, porta potti instead of $9-per-ft fancy head plumbing, etc. I admit that as a novice cruiser I'd go that route if I could go back and do it again.
It's too easy to keep working on the boat and put off cruising until the boat is "done". Then when you finally get out there you realize the boat still isn't done, and the goal is not to admire the perfectly countersunk silicon bronze screw you installed behind the holding tank; the goal is to watch the sunset with beer in hand while manta rays skim the water and the grill cooks your freshly caught grouper.
Don't get me wrong, it's more rewarding to do this from a boat you've proudly restored to high standard--but not rewarding to the point where you should delay cruising just to make the boat "perfect". You're young; you have plenty of time after (or during) cruising to execute a wish list on this boat or the next one. Go cruising in a boat that meets essential seaworthiness criteria for the cruising you intend, and let your time on the water inform further decisions regarding boat upgrades and ownership. That applies whether it's this Triton or a different boat. I suspect many of the folks who put a lot of time and money into a successful restoration do so because they have been messing around boats enough to know exactly what they want from the project.

Anyway, that's my unsolicited and possibly irrelevant rant for today. Take it with an enormous grain of salt. As pointed out earlier, you can buy a Cape Horn-ready Triton for 10k and spend a few months working to fill the kitty, or buy a semi-project boat and get it seaworthy for much less. The above rant is just to inspire you to be realistic and stay focused on the end game if you end up going the project boat route.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:59 pm

Greensboro, NC

But boat will end up in oriental or beaufort.

Edit: That rant makes a lot of sense!

Post by **Tim** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 6:57 am

FloatingMoneyPit wrote:Wow, I too expected much worse. God knows my T27 was in much rougher shape when I bought it.
If the boat is ok below the waterline and the engine runs reasonably well, I'd suggest you're in for some elbow grease, a re-core, standing rigging upgrade, and used sail shopping to get "out there". If you can control the very recalcitrant "what the boat wants, the boat gets" urges, you don't have to spend big bucks beyond these items. I saw a lot of happy cruisers on budget boats in the Bahamas that had solid re-cores but quick-n-dirty paint jobs, well worn sails, painted pine where varnished teak trim would normally be, a simple canvas tarp instead of dodger & bimini, an old boombox instead of a proper marine stereo, porta potti instead of $9-per-ft fancy head plumbing, etc. I admit that as a novice cruiser I'd go that route if I could go back and do it again.
It's too easy to keep working on the boat and put off cruising until the boat is "done". Then when you finally get out there you realize the boat still isn't done, and the goal is not to admire the perfectly countersunk silicon bronze screw you installed behind the holding tank; the goal is to watch the sunset with beer in hand while manta rays skim the water and the grill cooks your freshly caught grouper.
Don't get me wrong, it's more rewarding to do this from a boat you've proudly restored to high standard--but not rewarding to the point where you should delay cruising just to make the boat "perfect". You're young; you have plenty of time after (or during) cruising to execute a wish list on this boat or the next one. Go cruising in a boat that meets essential seaworthiness criteria for the cruising you intend, and let your time on the water inform further decisions regarding boat upgrades and ownership. That applies whether it's this Triton or a different boat. I suspect many of the folks who put a lot of time and money into a successful restoration do so because they have been messing around boats enough to know exactly what they want from the project.

Anyway, that's my unsolicited and possibly irrelevant rant for today. Take it with an enormous grain of salt. As pointed out earlier, you can buy a Cape Horn-ready Triton for 10k and spend a few months working to fill the kitty, or buy a semi-project boat and get it seaworthy for much less. The above rant is just to inspire you to be realistic and stay focused on the end game if you end up going the project boat route.

Well said. I think this can be boiled down to the simple point that anyone needs to "restore" (using the term loosely and non-specifically) their boat only to the point that makes them feel good, or makes them ready for whatever adventure is planned.

Those of us who take it to ridiculous levels do so only because it's what we like, not because it's what's needed.

Good luck. And be real sure you get your money's worth if you go for that expensive survey; tell the guy he might as well approach it as if it were a gold-plated Hatteras, and that he can just find a way past the dirt to really tell you what's what.

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:14 pm

Pre-pre-purchase survey...

"On July 12, 2007, at your request, I went on board a Pearson Triton sloop as it lay afloat at Mill Creek Marina near Annapolis, Maryland. The purpose was to do a "preliminary" inspection in an effort to determine if this vessel was worthy of a through inspection and the creation of an "in depth" Report of Survey.

It was immdiately apparent that normal and proper maintanance to this vessel has been neglected and ingnored for many years and that a thourough and well organized program of refitting and refurbishment must be accomplished before this vessel can be considered as suitable for daysailing or local cruising or a delievery down the Inland Waterway. It must be considered that there is no department of this vessel that is at present suitable for normal usage.

Some of the conditions found are here-in noted.

Since the vessel was afloat the codition of the laminates below the waterline cannot be determined. It is, however, readily apparent that this vessel has not been hauled for normal maintenance and bottom painting for many years.

The topsides (the hull between the waterline and the rail) were many years ago painted blue. This has since been much abused and scuffed and is very unsightly. Attempts to paint the deck, years ago, has laft drips of white paint running down the blue of the topsides.

The decks are of fiberglass with a core material evidently of balsa wood. Perhaps one-half of the decks are "mushy" as the result of water intrusion. It must be considered that this is a significant weakness. The deck serves to keep the hull from collapsing from the strain of the shrouds of the mast. The deck is no longer serving as a sound foundation for various items of deck mounted hardware such as the lifeline stantion bases.

The mast is stepped on the cabin top where the core material is also "mushy" and has settled down as the result of the thrust of the mast. Attempts have been made to reinforce the cabin top but the core is still mushy and water is dripping out of it to below decks.

The bow pulpit is severely bent and far beyond repair.

The wood trim around the decks is very rough and grainy and split and has not been coated with anything for years.

All surfaces above and below decks are rough and very unsightly and demanding of refinishing. Paint is flaking gnerally below decks and all is very dirty.

There are leaks at the cabin windows. One of the opening ports is missing and the hole has been covered with duck tape.

The engine is a Universal Atomic 4 gasolene engine that certainly is original with this boat. It is raw water cooled and the water jacket must be very corroded. No attempts were made to start this engine.

The sails were inspected where stowed. They are genrally old and weakened by exposure to the sun. There is a birds nest in the mainsail cover. The mainsail is very weakened. Then there is a #1 jib, #3 and a spinnaker.

Some DC rewiring has been done. The main panel is, however, right by the main hatch where it is exposed to water. Much of the wiring is not lead or secured to accepted standards. There is one battery and that is without charge.

A bladder type holding tank has recently been fitted at the discharge of the marine toilet. It may be suitable but is somewhat small.

The bunk cushions below decks are very old and not suitable for normal usage.

I have seldom seen a vessel that is afloat in such a mess.

The time necssary to bring this vessel to a condition where she would be suitable for normal local cruising would certainly be in excess of 1,000 hours of labor."

Ceasar Choppy · Post by **Ceasar Choppy** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:32 pm

Hey, look on the bright side, at least only half the decks need re-coring!

Much of the pre-survey is written in strong terms (typical CYA mode) but should not be shocking to anyone on this forum. At the same time, however, as other have said, do not underestimate the amount of time you would spend bringing her back.

If you do intend to go through with this, I would prioritize what needs to be done to get her structurally sound and floating properly. Once that is done, get her floating again and start spending time on the water to figure out what other issues need to be addressed. However, lthough cosmetics are usually the last item, because "its all connected" you may find you will need to paint those decks along with the recore.

If you have more money, however, again as other have said, there are plenty well found Tritons for $10K or less that would not need so much work.

Summersdawn · Post by **Summersdawn** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:45 pm

That survey seems unusually harsh to me. I see a boat that looks like it was possibly used last year for cruising. The dishes and cooler seem to be reasonably clean, without an overabundence of mildew/filth on them. The recently installed holding tank seems to reinforce this idea to me. The running rigging even looks clean/serviceable. And the brightwork doesn't even look bad.

The electrical seems to be in much better shape than most older boats. I'm not saying it is anywhere near perfect, but without seeing more detail ie behind the panel, looks not too bad.

Half the deck being mushy would be a pretty big recore job for most of us. I would personally consider this to be the main issue with this boat. Materials are fairly expensive, and it is going to be labour intensive. I haven't done anything more than a very minor deck recore, so perhaps I am not the best judge of it, but I am one of those people that want everything as near as perfect as possible, and could quite possibly drive myself insane trying to fair things when I was done. If you have done a frame off restoration, and are nearing completion on it, you probably have the gumption to see this through.

Of course this is all coming from someone who has never seen the boat in person, and is judging it by a handful of photographs, and a preliminary survey, so my rambling should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

(I did very little sailing in college...I think).

Ha ha ;-)

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:39 pm

Well... this is strange.

Just got an email from the seller that I need to look for another boat.

I guess the search continues...

Zach

Ceasar Choppy · Post by **Ceasar Choppy** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:27 pm

Perhaps a blessing in disguise. :) Good Luck!

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:56 pm

Not to worry, there are lots of Tritons out there just looking for some TLC. While I agree this boat does not look as bad as the described by the surveyor, trying to make a determination without being aboard her is difficult. If you want a Triton, you should be able to find a really nice one with out much difficulty. Keep in mind what others in this thread haves said, Tritons go for less than you would think, so you bang for buck can be exceptionally good with a little research. Also, Tim is always getting approached by people looking to sell or even give away Tritons so you are basically in the right place if you are looking.

Good luck, and I hope to see you in the Caribbean on of these days on your Triton.

Post by **Tim** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:28 pm

Zach wrote:Just got an email from the seller that I need to look for another boat.

That's probably for the best. While the surveyor is clearly not used to looking at inexpensive project boats, the pre-report report makes it clear that there were a number of serious issues to be dealt with.

I think it would have been unreasonable to think that you would have been able to make this one what you wanted her to be and go cruising for 6 months or a year for only $10,000. Keep searching. There are plenty of boats out there waiting for a new owner. You may need to travel for the right one, however, unless your time frame is pretty open-ended.

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:25 pm

Oh that's hilarious.

Hello, owner of surveyed boat. Lurk much?

Apart from the whole "hasn't been hauled for years" thing, that sounds pretty much like my boat when I found it. My survey report wasn't half as entertaining, though! I gotta have a beer with this guy!

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:56 pm

Just to add my two cents.

I used to think that finding a boat that needed a little work would be an inexpensive way into the cruising life.

Now I believe that taking on a project boat is clearly the most expensive way to get into cruising. It is far FAR cheaper to buy as much boat as you can afford that has what you need already.

You could drop ten thousand dollars into that boat and never know the difference. In my own personal case; after the first ten thousand my boat looked much worse than when I started.

Projects are only good if you like the work and you want to customize a boat.

Your dollars will go farther if a buy a boat whose major systems and components have already been upgraded.

Oops, I guess Jason already beat me to it.

Also, while I am a big fan of Tritons, I feel the need to add that they are cheap for a reason. Most of them are pretty worn out and they were never that luxurious a boat to begin with. The hulls are great. If you want a project then that is probably all you are going to keep anyway so it makes sense to buy the cheapest boat with a good hull available. I think Tritons make excellenct project boats but otherwise you are getting what you pay for.

And by the way, hasn't that boat been on Ebay before?

-Britton

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:25 pm

Yup, it was an ebay boat.

Post by **Tim** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:32 am

Hey Zach,

Did you see this posting?

http://triton381.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2836

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 9:55 pm

Thanks Tim

Heading up to take a look at it.

Zach

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:09 pm

So... I bought it.

Decks are a little soft, and the mast has sunk into the deck... but it sure sails well.

How much up and down play should there be in the rudder? It doesnt have any side to side, but up and down is 3/4 to an inch of free play. The tiller is also a little sloppy... but a few shims on the bolt going through the rudder head ought to fix that.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:53 am

Congratulations, and welcome to the club! :)

KAHOLEE didn't have much rudder play at all.

Robert The Gray · Post by **Robert The Gray** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:56 am

congratulations captain zack

does she have a name?

r

jollyboat · Post by **jollyboat** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:59 am

The Triton that is for sale in Maine is the one to get. Asking price is sane and I am sure neg. within reason. I say buy a boat that may need some work but still able to sail it. I am also inclined to agree with a statement that Tim made on another thread about having two boats - one to work on and one to sail on. Sails are not a problem. Any Triton sailor with sail issues please contact me and I will help you. Old sails we can fix up and new sails will not hurt your purse that much.

Jason K · Post by **Jason K** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:43 am

So... I bought it.

Nice! Congratulations Zach!

When do we get the full report - current condition, plans, photos, etc.? By noon, I hope?

There was very little motion in the rudder on my Triton. I had to tighten the bolt on the head, but once that was done, it was pretty solid.

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:05 am

High fives!

Can't wait to hear (and see) more about your new boat. This is the place you can go on and on about your new obsession and find nary a bored ear in the bunch :-)

Rachel

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 1:14 pm

Welcome to the club! Dues are 6 pics/month.

Do we know the hull number?
(did I just read right past it like an idiot?)

Post by **dasein668** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 3:54 pm

Was this the Craigs List one that Tim cross posted above? If so, the pics make it look like a pretty good boat for the price, even with soft decks. Congrats!

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:20 pm

Yup, Craigslist boat.

It is number 101, but was the 234th Triton built. Delivered new April 1, 1961 as Vanity II. Sold in 1973, name change to Pylasteki... which I don't know how to pronounce!

Its got a ton of paper work, including the blue prints/layout and original sail plan. (I'm going to see if kinkos can scan them!)

I'll need to add a holding tank for the head before bringing it down... can't handle that fine!

The other one that I'm wondering about, is the top 1/4 of the mast bows aft, it is a fractional rig so I'm wondering if the adjustable back stay (tons of blocks) is cranked super tight to do that?

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:35 pm

Does it bow aft, or does it just taper?
Does it have jumper stays?

Yes, if someone honked on the adjustable backstay, it will put some bend in the mast. Don't leave it like that for extended periods, only when weather conditions and sail shape warrant.

Pylasteki.... that rings a bell somehow.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:32 pm

Congrats Zach!

I just took a look through some old records and #101 was reported as being built on the west coast at some point. My records are hardly reliable though and I only record what other people have said or posted online. The last known owner that I show is Jim Schwartz with no other information given other than the boat name Pylasteki

As far as the boat being built out of sequence, I know of five boats in the 101-107 range that are all reported as being built out west. Pearson reserved groups of hull #'s for Aeromarine which would explain why the boat wasn't built at the same time other east coast built boats in that hull range.

Looking at those pictures I would say there is some bad data in there somewhere. I don't know much about the west coast series but the pictures don't strike me as 'west coast type' to me. Between the wood combings and the fact that you don't seem to have solid cored decks I would say you definitely have an east coast Triton. No such thing as definite in the Triton world though.

Maybe the hull # was reserved for a west coast boat but was never used so Pearson "took it back" at some point and used it on one of their boats coming out of Bristol.

If you get the chance, NETA has probably the most complete listing of Tritons anywhere, and listing your boat with them would be a plus for the Triton community.

Don't worry about the holding tank, buy or borrow a porta-potty to keep you legal for now. Just my opinion of course.

-Britton

Rachel · Post by **Rachel** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:57 pm

I've seen photos of that boat racing, I think. Maybe in the Chesapeake/Annapolis area mag, "SpinSheet"?

I always wondered if the name was a tongue-in-cheek way of saying "plastic-ey" (or is that "plasticky"), as in a boat made of "plastic."

It's been hours, yet still no photos.

;-)

(We're relentless)

Rachel

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:09 pm

Pictures from the ad are here: http://picasaweb.google.com/evanjeffcoat/TheTriton

Yeah the build sequence is funny... it came with a ships log that the first page listed the #234, under agreement with Clint Pearson to hold 101 until it was built. But 101 is stamped in the main beam, and on the inside of the cabin, over the sink!

Where should the bronze # plate be?

Post by **Tim** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:49 am

Figment wrote:Pylasteki.... that rings a bell somehow.

Possibly from this older thread.

Or perhaps from here.

Rachel wrote:I always wondered if the name was a tongue-in-cheek way of saying "plastic-ey" (or is that "plasticky"), as in a boat made of "plastic."

Interesting...that makes a lot of sense, actually, and is sort of a good name if that's indeed the case. Given the era in which the boat received that name (1973, according to Zach's papers), that seems an apt and clever choice.

It never would have occurred to me to read it that way, but then again I can't decipher most people's vanity plates on their cars either. I'm too literal, I guess.

Zach wrote:It came with a ships log that the first page listed the #234, under agreement with Clint Pearson to hold 101 until it was built.

That sounds like a really interesting document in the overall Pearson history. Take good care of that! I wonder what significance "101" had to that original owner.

At least you have solid paperwork to support the boat's ownership and hull number for your documentation! The hull number is clearly 101, regardless of where in the sequence the boat was actually built.

Zach wrote:So... I bought it.

Excellent. Nice and decisive: you saw a decent boat for a fair price, and decided she was the right one. No messing around. Now you can move forward with the real plans. (Which, of course, you'll be thoroughly documenting for us with lots of new photos...hehe)

Zach · Post by **Zach** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:19 pm

Just took a bunch of pictures of the blue prints... but don't have anywhere to upload them. 4 megabites each, so the free stuff doesnt want them.

Anyone want to host them?

Zach