Cherub ForumCherub ChatTech ChatHelp identify my cherub!
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Author Topic: Help identify my cherub!  (Read 1163 times)
phil_kirk
Association Member
Guru's Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1263


« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2011, 12:30:53 pm »

Quote
mitigating against increased torsional load with liberal use of fibre / epoxy! Has anyone done this to their old boat? if so any advice / pitfalls?

The trick is inteligent use of fibres aligned in the right directions atached to strong bits of boat, using enough resin and consolidating the lot well. You may be surprised how little fibre is needed to make a strong connection if done properly.
When we bought Slippery we had to remove copious amounts of resin from the bow which was not doing anything.

Good luck.

When you've had time to collect and look at the boat post any questions you may have and we will do our best to advise.
Logged
gilly900
Newb
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #16 on: August 07, 2011, 06:19:08 pm »

ok, up in Newcastle and pressganged my father into helping drag the boat out of the gloom to have a good look and get some better photos.  Please see attached photos and any more thoughts on design or ideas on direction for refurb!
Logged
gilly900
Newb
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #17 on: August 07, 2011, 06:21:12 pm »

photos. .
Logged
gilly900
Newb
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #18 on: August 07, 2011, 06:23:28 pm »

more photos.
Logged
gilly900
Newb
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #19 on: August 07, 2011, 06:26:16 pm »

and more! Nice daggerboard but delaminating at the bottom!
Logged
ross_burkin
Guru's Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 595



« Reply #20 on: August 07, 2011, 07:25:00 pm »

Quality project! I'd stick to 90's rules, maybe with bigger kite though. A false floor will add a lot of weight but will stop the transom sinking so much in the light stuff.
Logged

2675 Fuzzy Logic  97/05 rules

Serious plannage in the works...
JimC
Guru's Assistant
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 297



« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2011, 10:18:45 pm »

Not a Jennifer Julian with that transom I reckon. Nor, I think, one of the more common designs... The stern is Spencer7ish, but the sail no and construction seems too late for that. Interesting to see the rocker line. I wonder what the records say about the sail number.
Logged
phil_kirk
Association Member
Guru's Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1263


« Reply #22 on: August 08, 2011, 11:17:39 pm »

OK
From the records and this is Will's boat archive sail no 2501 was built in 1976 by Comander to a Spencer design and owned by M. Commander. The archive does not identify which Spencer design it is but I would guess it is a spencer 7 or a Spencer design which was tweaked by the builder. The previous Spencer design was built in 1971 sail no. 1721.
Also from the archive Comander is not recorded to have built any previous cherubs. I would therefore guess that this was a home build to an existing set of plans.
2501 was called 'Twinkle'.

2501 was also the first sail no. of a new batch for the UK class. The previous UK sail no. in the sequence was 2450 Easter Beagle to the Duke/Hows design. 2450 is the last for which I have a copy of the original measurement certificates.  Other designs common in 1976 were Forman 4's and Jennifer Julians, Deeley, a Patterson an Caisley and a few others. Quite a lot of variety in design at that point.

Logged
JimC
Guru's Assistant
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 297



« Reply #23 on: August 10, 2011, 12:54:28 pm »

I *vaguely* recall Mike Commander... I have a memory that a few unbuilt Spencer 7 kits were knocking around about that time, so maybe Mike picked one of those up and gave it a contemporary interior layout. Got to wonder why though, although perhaps he tweaked the shape a bit.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2011, 10:46:40 pm by JimC » Logged
phil_kirk
Association Member
Guru's Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1263


« Reply #24 on: August 10, 2011, 01:24:40 pm »

That makes sense,

I was wondering why a standalone Spencer turns up several years after the previous one had been built.  As design had moved on it wouldn't have been as competitive as the current boats.
The benefit for Gilly is that he has the newest example of the design.

Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Jump to: