Misc Medalist pics

[fusto]

A fellow Medalist owner asked me for some photos of various projects I did (am doing) on my boat.
But instead of emailing them privately I figured I'd post them here for general consumption.

Theres no running theme just a bunch of different things.
Any comments at all on anything would also be welcome.


She wanted a pic of the dodger that came with the boat, but this is the only one I have.
It was pretty much one of the first things to get bagged and stuffed in the attic.



Last fall I replaced the portlights in the topsides. The old ones were really crazed and had been poorly replaced at some point in the past.
I bought a sheet of 1/2 lexan, traced each portlight using the old ones as templates (they're all different of course...)
and then because it was a little proud had one of the shipwrights relieve the edge for me so it would sit flush with the hull.
The depth of the recess is some non standard measurement and not very consistent.


This is the tang on my mast for the inner forestay and running backs.
This is not typical Medalist. It was added to my boat because I have a taller rig than standard (mast and rig off a Northeast 38).


This is what was provided for me to attach my innner forestay too.
This kind of scares me.
Any comments at all on this setup would be welcome.
Another rigger at my yard said that maybe the inner forestay and running backs were just there to stabilize the rig and keep it from pumping,
not for flying sails from.
Maybe...


Another shot. Theres no backing plate under the deck plate and its held to the deck with 10/24 bronze screws.
How could anybody in their right mind think this would be acceptable for attaching a shroud to?!


This is one of the padeyes on the sidedeck for the running backs.


Icky maststep.


Before and after cockpit sole. Im waiting for warmer weather to varnish.


This is the lid to my hull integral fuel tank.
I had to grind all the bolts off to get it off.


Pretty scary piece of junk.


I ground all the glassed in bolts down flush and encapsulated them in glass and resin. Then I drilled new holes and potted SS nuts in epoxy.
The new lid I made from FRP flatstock just bolts right down. (sorry no pic yet)


It was pretty much the same drill with the water tank.


It was a lot cleaner inside than I would have thought for a 40+ year old boat.


I still need to put in a cleanout port.

OK thats it!

[JonnyBoats]

Your bilges look just like my LeComte Northeast 38. Your ?Pretty scary piece of junk? looks identical to the top of my fuel tank. I was able to remove all the nuts holding the plate, but so far I have been unable to pry up the plate.

I have had problems with water getting into my fuel tank. Did you do anything to improve the tank while you had it open?

I see you have a mast and rig from a Northeast 38. Do you have any better shots of the tang for the inner forestay and running backs? Also can you tell me the dimensions of your rig? Specifically how high above the deck and or spreaders is the tang? I ask because I think I want to add an inner forestay to my NE 38.

[fusto]

Your bilges look just like my LeComte Northeast 38. Your ?Pretty scary piece of junk? looks identical to the top of my fuel tank. I was able to remove all the nuts holding the plate, but so far I have been unable to pry up the plate.

Since I new I wasnt saving it, I jammed a prybar under it and it popped right off. The tank was 100% full of water which I assumed leaked in from around the lid since the boat hasnt been in the water in about 6 years.

I have had problems with water getting into my fuel tank. Did you do anything to improve the tank while you had it open?

Its still open and it appears tight internally.
Ill pressure test it once I have the new lid permanently affixed.

I see you have a mast and rig from a Northeast 38. Do you have any better shots of the tang for the inner forestay and running backs? Also can you tell me the dimensions of your rig? Specifically how high above the deck and or spreaders is the tang? I ask because I think I want to add an inner forestay to my NE 38.

Ask and ye shall receive.
Specific measurements will be coming forthwith.


Seems like an awfully tall mast for a 32 foot boat. Or maybe its just an optical delusion...


Rough shot of the rigging.


Backside of the tang. You can roughly see how high above the spreaders it is.


Closeup.
Its really nothing fancy. Almost kind of cheesy even.

[Tim]

This is what was provided for me to attach my innner forestay too.
This kind of scares me.
Any comments at all on this setup would be welcome.
Another rigger at my yard said that maybe the inner forestay and running backs were just there to stabilize the rig and keep it from pumping,
not for flying sails from.
Maybe...


Another shot. Theres no backing plate under the deck plate and its held to the deck with 10/24 bronze screws.
How could anybody in their right mind think this would be acceptable for attaching a shroud to?!


This is one of the padeyes on the sidedeck for the running backs.

Oh, I doubt that whoever installed the inner forestay and running backs did it just to stabilize the mast. I rather suspect that they just didn't have a clue as to what forces might be placed upon the attachment points, and/or that they were looking for a cheap way out.

A padeye in a threaded deck plate for a forestay attachment, all secured to the deck with little screws? Come on!

And one of those flush/removable temporary tiedown padeye things for running backs? Come on!

You'd be OK. For 30 minutes or so! hehe

Clearly, those attachments are inadequate all the way around! It's amazing what people will do. I wouldn't trust any of those attachments even if the stays were truly only to sort of stabilize the mast. Woefully weak.

The inner forestay attachment, in particular, needs to be beefy if one has any designs on using the stay for something like a heavy weather sail (which is a logical use)--or any sail, for that matter. You can secure it to a bulkhead beneath, or perhaps use a tie rod to transmit the loads to some other strong point of the boat.

The running back attachment could survive with a beefy deck fitting and large backing plate, depending on what other options for attachment there might be.

[JonnyBoats]

Thank you for the additional photos. Taking a look at your closeup, (copy here)



I would say this is definately not up to LeComte standards. For example it looks like the forestay is rigged with a shackle rather than a proper toggle. Also shouldn't there be toggles on the runners as well?

Have you checked with Art to see if he knows if the boat originally had runners or if they were added later?

[fusto]

Clearly, those attachments are inadequate all the way around! It's amazing what people will do. I wouldn't trust any of those attachments even if the stays were truly only to sort of stabilize the mast. Woefully weak.

Yeah, I completely agree with all your points.
I was sort of on the fence about eliminating the IF and running backs while redoing the rig, leaning towards getting rid of them anyway.
Now I think I definitely will.
It all seems just too cheesy.

[fusto]

It was definitely added after the fact.
The quality is nothing like the rest of the mast hardware.

I emailed Art Karpf about it last year, but he never got back to me.

I asked the previous owners about it as well and they said they never used it.
Just left it lashed to the mast, and they owned the boat for about 20 years of its life.

Like I said in a previous post, I'm probably going to eliminate it.

[Chris Campbell]

Those side deck padeyes look like ones that I have on my Northeast 38 also - it was my understanding that they were for the boom vang - one of those dual vangs that act as a vang and a poor excuse for a preventer also. We don't use them, however, preferring to vang to the jib track on the somewhat rare occasions when we do vang (the boom is usually heavy enough to not need one!).

Seems somewhat likely that a previous owner decided to use hardware that was already there where possible to rig the inner stays.

Do you have jibs (or jib) that would go on an inner forestay? Being a roller furling user, I've been thinking that it would be really nice to have some way to get a smaller jib up there, and an inner forestay is something I've been considering. I would probably rig it from the masthead to a much sturdier attachment point on the foredeck, though (take advantage of the bulkhead that forms the aft end of the anchor locker) and hooks on with a pelican hook or something similar. Then I wouldn't worry about runners and would stow it most of the time. No time soon, mind you, there are a few other projects to get done first!

[fusto]

Do you have jibs (or jib) that would go on an inner forestay?

The boat did come with a tiny little storm sail.
Looks original.
But no roller furling in evidence so it could have been flown from the head stay.

[svMaja]

hey Zach thnanks for the photos... especially the dodger. Mine just barely covers the hatchway.

about that welded padeye. next time I go to the boat i will shoot you a photo of what i have...

for the rest of you... the medalist is designed to fly a staysail yes.. the chainplate cover has another cover with a bronze ...geez..how do I describe this... its a flat plate set like and L with the bottom of the L the chain bin cover that screws in. On my medalist 33, Maja, about even with the forward end of the doghouse window is a stainless screw set in the deck to a plate that is thru bolted to the interior overhead. One unscrews that to put another stainless screw that has a blow attached.
The premise is to run the staysail lines thru this block thus keeping the lines from the staysail and genoa seperate. its really an ingenious idea.

My medalist differs from zachs in that the rudder on mine is the original bill tripp design. zach has the version 2 of the medalist for rudder that is.
My mast is 42 feet or is it 46 i keep forgetting. I have an original mast.
roller furler included. NO bowsprit. where Zach has one cleat forward I have two.
bella
sv Maja
1962
medalist 33

This is what was provided for me to attach my innner forestay too.
This kind of scares me.
Any comments at all on this setup would be welcome.
Another rigger at my yard said that maybe the inner forestay and running backs were just there to stabilize the rig and keep it from pumping,
not for flying sails from.
Maybe...


Another shot. Theres no backing plate under the deck plate and its held to the deck with 10/24 bronze screws.
How could anybody in their right mind think this would be acceptable for attaching a shroud to?!


This is one of the padeyes on the sidedeck for the running backs.

Oh, I doubt that whoever installed the inner forestay and running backs did it just to stabilize the mast. I rather suspect that they just didn't have a clue as to what forces might be placed upon the attachment points, and/or that they were looking for a cheap way out.

A padeye in a threaded deck plate for a forestay attachment, all secured to the deck with little screws? Come on!

And one of those flush/removable temporary tiedown padeye things for running backs? Come on!

You'd be OK. For 30 minutes or so! hehe

Clearly, those attachments are inadequate all the way around! It's amazing what people will do. I wouldn't trust any of those attachments even if the stays were truly only to sort of stabilize the mast. Woefully weak.

The inner forestay attachment, in particular, needs to be beefy if one has any designs on using the stay for something like a heavy weather sail (which is a logical use)--or any sail, for that matter. You can secure it to a bulkhead beneath, or perhaps use a tie rod to transmit the loads to some other strong point of the boat.

The running back attachment could survive with a beefy deck fitting and large backing plate, depending on what other options for attachment there might be.