09-12-2005, 07:29 | |
Boat: Farr 11.6 (AKA Farr 38) Synergy | 35's seemed to have an upgraded build and design quality relative to Endeavour's earlier models. The 35's were a Bruce Kelly design rather than a Johnson design like the earlier Endeavours. I have always thought that Bruce was a very tallented . These seem to have had a very loyal following. Jeff |
09-12-2005, 07:56 | |
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt) | . The 35 uses encapsulated lead ballast, whereas Id prefer a suspended exterior (but its not a deal breaker). It's got the preferred "internal flange" hull/deck joint. All in all, this could be an excellent choice for the , at the right . Endeavour 35 Sailboat Specifications FWIW, Gord |
10-12-2005, 16:45 | |
it causes larger than normal problems. And a shop familiar with this coring needs to be employed. All but one of the boats we looked at had problems. - The step is a very prone area. All the boats had had this are repaired. - All owners and brokers claim it is a "tender" boat. Good or bad, you'll have to decide on that one. - All the boats had leaky . A "common" Endeavour problem. - For a cruiser they have respectable speed. Three of the boats had a handfull of trophies to their credit. - When maintained they sure look better than most of the marina stock. Here's a review someone provided me: [URL] Good luck Bob | |
12-12-2005, 04:25 | |
Boat: Farr 11.6 (AKA Farr 38) Synergy | than Balsa. This is especially true when used as a material where sheer tends to be less of a problem than moisture problems. Klegecell is a crosslinked closed cell foam making migration next to impossible (at least as this material is generally described in the literature.) Jeff |
12-12-2005, 05:56 | |
Boat: Tayana 37, M-20/I-20 Scow | , accidental impacts to the deck would soon create a of the structure. Granted that such sport boats are laid up with the thinnest possible schedule of laminates to keep the overall weight to a minimum and that Klegecel with the probably proper overlayers of adequate protection would perform as well as balsa for this 'light-weight' construction; but, probably needed a heavier layer of laminate over it to protect it. So, from such observations from a very limited application it seems that one needs a much thicker of kelgecel in comparison to balsa - not with respect to 'box beam' requirements but just to address the 'recovery' and impact strength of kelgecel. Again, this was the situation about 25 years ago, so with new formulations the product may be vastly improved. |
12-12-2005, 16:38 | |
. These other guys sound like they know the material. Just what I've read and been told. But, we know how that stuff goes. We looked at the Endeavour 35's after falling for the Endeavour 38 CC. But, being out of my price range. Still like most Endeavor models. Good luck. | |
12-12-2005, 16:48 | |
Boat: currently "on the beach" | |
12-12-2005, 18:19 | |
Boat: Morgan 382 "Tropical Wave" | incursion if you go aground and damage the . The other question I had - without , how do you provide a ground for disipation? I think our J/30 was grounded to the . Thanks again! John |
12-12-2005, 18:54 | |
Boat: Farr 11.6 (AKA Farr 38) Synergy | , I personally strongly prefer a bolt on keel rather than an encapsulated keel.) Heres the way I see it. Lets start with the basics, niether bolt on keels or encapsulated keels are inherently stronger or weaker. It all comes down to how any given example of each is actually engineered. They each have to deal with a variety of loads and they both have to spread these loads out into the and they both have to deal with the trauma of a heeled boat dropping off a wave or running at speed into an immoveable object. If you look at the way side forces , the maximum force occurs where the keel stub hits the hull and not necessarily where the ballast meets the hull. The keel is a simple cantilever and maximum bending moment occurs at the fold in the hull where it turns down toward the keel. What happens structurally at the bottom of the keel is almost irrelevant to the discussion. So it is that the area that turns down into the keel needs to really have a lot of strength and that area needs to be reinforced to distribute the loads out into the hull. In a properly designed hull, there are a series of athwartship frames that take the load out into the hull and often there is a longitudinal frame that distribues these loads fore and aft. It does not matter whether we are talking about a bolt on keel or an encapsulted keel, these framing elements are critical to achieving the necessary strength in this area of the boat almost no matter how thick you make the . And these athwartship members have to be connected to the ballast keel so that they take the sideward moments (bending forces) from the ballast keel and connect them to the rest of the hull. Here's where it gets harder (but not imposible for an encapsulated keel). If you visualize a boat with an encapsulated keel at an extreme angle of heel, the weight of the ballast keel has a lot of leverage pushing against the sides of the encapsulation. The high side of the keel where the ballast ends is trying to pry the encapsulation away from the ballast. All that glues the ballast to the encapsulation typically is a polyester resin slurry. Polyester resin is not a great especially to lead or iron, and so oved time that adhesion fails. You might think that is no big deal. The ballast is in there and where can it go. But lets go back to our earlier discussion. As I said earlier it is critical to transfer the side loads from the ballast to the athwartships frames. In a properly encapsolated keel, this is done through a series of bonds. To explain, once the ballast keel is 'glued' in place in the fiberglass keel cavity, the top of the keel is glassed over. Normally this layer is pretty thin and is only intended to keep water out of the keel and if there athwartships frames, provide bonding for the athwartships frames. Then the athwartships frames are bonded to this membrane. Done right and still intact, the ballast transfers its loads to the sides of the keel cavity, which transfers most of the loads to the athwartships frames through the membrane at the top of the keel. And there in lies the problem, once the bond between the F.G. keel and the ballast has loosened the ballast is prying the top of the keel membrane away from the side of the keel cavity and with that goes a weakening of the athwarships connection to the hull. Walk around most any boatyard with a lucite hammer and tap out the area about 6" to a foot below the top of the ballast on any older boat with an encapsulated keel and you will find that many, if not most, have a void in this area. In fact as I have pointed out in prior discussions of this topic, over the years I have frequently walked around boat yards tapping on encapsulated keels doing an informal . As many as 50% percent of the encasulated keels that I have knocked on have delamination voids that were in excess of a foot in diameter, wiith many having total delamination. Making this problem worse is that this is an area that is next to imposible to because once water gets in there (and it does) it is very hard to re-establish a connection between the ballast keel and the hull. Now then run that boat aground. There's a couple things at here. First of all, it is very hard to do a proper glassing job at the bottom of the keel. You are laying up glass in a narrow cavity that a person really can't get into very well. Although there are lots of tricks to doing the work in these tight areas, having repaired quite a few of these in my day, the glass work at the bottom of keels is very heavy, from the laps in the cloth, but not very sturdy. There are usually large lenses of unreiforced resin and sections of dry cloth. When you run aground hard, the force generally crushes the cloth and drives the ballast upward against the membrane toward the top of the keel and the athwardhip frames, and creates a rotation that pulls downward at the forward end of the keel and upward at the aft end. Now you have a leak. Maybe small maybe large, but not one that can be easily repaired to full strength, People often think that an encapsulated keel must be stronger because the keel membrane is integral with the hull. While it is true that the keel cavity is integral with the hull, the ballast in not integral with the with the keel cavity. So it comes down to whether you trust a not extremely good glue (polyester resin) or pretty massive mechanical fasteners. So now for the other side of the story with bolt on keels. In the case of a bolt on keel you really do have greater . The fairing materials tend to be short lived. This is a pain in the neck process and even using it has to be done every 7 to 10 years. (That said it is no worse than fixing that come from moisture trapped between the keel cavity and the ballast working its way out through the not so great glasswork in the keel cavity. But not every encapsulated keel boat gets while every bolt on keel boat sooner or later needs refairing.) At some point, on most production boats with bolt on keels the SS keel bolts need to be replaced. (I have never understood why for just a little more cost the industry does not use Monel Keel bolts but that is another story) When we talk about the strength of a bolt on keel we are really discussing depending on the ability to make a mechanical connection vs than a glued connection. I'm a mechanical connection kind of guy. Also The stub is generally shallow enough that you can get really good glass work and the overlaps occur so that you have the thickest amount of glass where you need it most, right at the top of the keel. Often, on better built, low volume boats, the athwartships frames are often glassed right in as the hull is being laid up. (On less expensive boats and mass produced boats the frames are generally molded separately or as part of the liner and glassed or glued in.) The keel bolts then pass through the outward turned tabbing or flanges on the frames making a solid mechanical connection. In the same grounding as above, the metal (especially lead) absorbs much of the shock of the impact before ever distributing the loads to the keel bolts. The bolts have to distribute all of the loads in a compact area. Here is where engineering is critical and why there is nothing worse than a poorly engineered bolt on keel, and nothing better than a properly engineered one. In that impact, the aft end of the keel pushes up. In a properly engineered bolt on keel, that upward force is distributed through a solidly engineered frame at the aft end of keel which carries the loads into a wide area of the boat. Often there will be a bulkhead (seat face or other cabinetry) or massive longitudinal tied to this frame that distributes the loads fore and aft, and a athwartships bulkhead that distributes the loads into the hull and deck. (That same structure should be there in an encapsulted keel but it absolutely needs to be there on a bolt on.) At the forward end of the keel there needs to be a similar frame as well. This is the frame is perhaps easier to . It only needs to have sufficient bearing area to not slice down through the hull and to withstand the withdrawal forces of the forward keel bolts. Lastly there is shear but that's the easy one. All it takes is enough surface area on the bolts and enough bearing plate area to prevent the bolts from acting strictly in sheer. Of course a proper bolt on keel requires better engineering and is probably a more expensive keel to build. The keel casting must be made carefully. The bolts, and bearing plates are expensive. Great care must be taken in boring the holes for the keel bolts and there is a lot of labor and handwork in fairing the keel. This is why a lot of manufacturers take the short cut of doing an encapsulated keel. This is especially true of smaller production yards where the cost of precision tooling a keel casting can be exessive. In the end it is a off between the maintainable and the low . Encapsulated keels are low maintenance until they can no longer be repaired. Once upon a time, wooden boats had internal ballast, but they went to bolt on keels for the same reasons outlined here. For those of us, like myself, who tend to own older boats, I would think that the ability to repair a bolt on keel far outweighs the potentially lower maintenance of an encapsulated keel. At least that's how I see it. Respectfully, Jeff |
13-12-2005, 03:18 | |
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt) | : Jeff said it much better than I would have. I generally prefer the transparency of an external keel - I can easily see how it was engineered, constructed, and maintained, which is generally not as readily apparent on an encapsulated keel. You can see the keel stub force grid, the keel-stub joint fairing, and any water intrusion collects (visibly) in the . The external keel stub provides a good sump. The external keels force grid also helps take the and loads, minimizing the hull and deck stress and deformation. Light groundings bruise an external lead keel, but could fracture the fibreglass encapsulation (with the attendant water intrusion). The fairing of the external keel-stub joint is easy to inspect & maintain when bottom painting. An encapsulated keel requires that you install an external ground strip or plate. In any case, the only suitable keel material is LEAD (ok, maybe uranium?) - watch out for steel/concrete internal ballast). As is so often the case, its a trade-off analysis, and perhaps (like Jeff) Im a biased towards the mechanical. Others might make convincing arguments for encapsulated ballast. FWIW, OMHO, Gord May |
13-12-2005, 05:57 | |
Boat: currently "on the beach" | ? I understand JBoat has a small drain in the to deal with their version of the latter issue. capt lar |
13-12-2005, 06:38 | |
Boat: Morgan 382 "Tropical Wave" | on the keel, about 6" below the hull, but I don't seeing a drain on the of any of the J/24/29/30's. Of course these are all 20+ year old boats, so drains in the rudder may be something TPI have started with the more recent wave of J/boats. And thanks for the dissertation on keels Jeff, that's all really good info for a like me. John |
13-12-2005, 12:40 | |
Boat: currently "on the beach" | recently told me of a keel that had several gallons trapped. capt lar |
Thread Tools | |
Rate This Thread | |
: |
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
ENDEAVOUR 35. Save to Favorites . Beta Marine. BOTH. US IMPERIAL. METRIC. Sailboat Specifications Definitions Hull Type: Fin with rudder on skeg: Rigging Type: Masthead Sloop: LOA: 35.42 ft / 10.80 m ... Kelsall Sailing Performance (KSP): Another measure of relative speed potential of a boat. It takes into consideration "reported" sail area ...
According the the Endeavour 35 brochure, Kelley gave the boat the proportions necessary to be very fast upwind while retaining the room below to accomodate a comfortable layout. Note the focus on upwind performance which would have signaled a philsophical shift away from the heavy shoal draft cruising boats more suited to reaching conditions.
The immersion rate is defined as the weight required to sink the boat a certain level. The immersion rate for Endeavour 35 is about 223 kg/cm, alternatively 1251 lbs/inch. Meaning: if you load 223 kg cargo on the boat then it will sink 1 cm. Alternatively, if you load 1251 lbs cargo on the boat it will sink 1 inch.
John, We looked at and for an Endeavour 35 for the same purpose. Have since found a more suitable boat for us. After looking at 5 35's here are some things we learned in our search: - If any moisture gets into the Klegecell cored deck it causes larger than normal problems. And a repair shop familiar with this coring needs to be employed. All but one of the boats we looked at had problems.
Endeavour 35 is a 35′ 5″ / 10.8 m monohull sailboat designed by Bruce Kelley and built by Endeavour Yacht Corp. between 1983 and 1987. ... The lower a boat's ratio is, the less power it takes to drive the boat to its nominal hull speed or beyond. Read more. Formula. D/L = (D ÷ 2240) ÷ (0.01 x LWL)³ D: Displacement of the boat in pounds ...
1984 Endeavour 35.5 Sloop"Runaway" has benefited from numerous upgrades and is well equipped for cruising on the East Coast or Bahamas. Solid 1980's construction, roomy interior and good sailing performance at a very reasonable price. Brewer Yacht Sales is pleased to assist you in the purchase of this vessel.
Endeavour. Endeavour is a yacht brand that currently has 35 yachts for sale on YachtWorld, including 3 new vessels and 32 used yachts, listed by experienced yacht brokers and boat dealerships mainly in the following countries: United States and Mexico.
The Endeavour 35 is a 35.42ft masthead sloop designed by Bruce Kelley and built in fiberglass by Endeavour Yacht Corp. (USA) between 1983 and 1987. 300 units have been built. The Endeavour 35 is a moderate weight sailboat which is a good performer. It is very stable / stiff and has a low righting capability if capsized.
Endeavour 35 Sailboat Plan View and Interior Layout
Endeavour 35 A STATEMENT OF EXCELLENCE . INTERIOR he interior shown above combines all of our design aims pertaining to each area of the yacht. The head area sports a ... one quality sailboat that is still affordable. Endeavour Yacht Corporation 11700 So. Belcher Road Largo, Florida 33543 (813) 541-3553 .
Beautiful 1983 Endeavor 35 with custom sugar scoop. This is a turnkey blue-water / liveaboard cruiser. Comfortable accommodations to sleep 5. Custom transom arch with electronic davits. New 1000 watt solar panel system and 60A Renogy Rover MPPT charge controller with Bluetooth app for phone and Victron battery monitor.
1983 Endeavour 35 Sloop This Endeavour 35 Sloop is a Bruce Kelley designed vessel, hull # 133 out of 300 built that may well be the most spacious and comfortable 35 foot boat built. She performs very well to weather and can be easily single handed. She has a wide beam, beautiful teak interior, all the creature comforts for extended cruising.
LOA (Length Overall) 10.80 Meters / (35 feet and 5 inch) L.W.L(Length WaterLine) 8.99 Meters / (29 feet and 6 inch) Parts And Accessories: Endeavour 35 Parts
Endeavor Victory 35 Catamaran For Sale By Owner Location: Freeport, NY Asking: $85,000 (USD) S/V DZIKA is a Atlantic based 1998 Endeavour 35 Victory catamaran for sale by owner.35′ Catamaran that has lots of great features. Easy to live on and sail. This boat does need a little TLC, but much more than just the bones are great on this boat.
2001 35' Endeavour Catamaran Corporation Victory 35 Sailing Catamaran sailboat for sale in Ft Myers Florida. Home. ... Draft. Location. Price. 2001. 35' 16' 3.5' Florida. $149,500. Description: This 2001 Endeavour Sailing Catamaran is fully equipped, and turn-key ready for your next great adventure! This beautiful catamaran received a full 10 ...
Data And technical specifications of Endeavour 35.5 equipments, fuel economy, dimensions, weight, engine power and prices . Sea Ray ... 35.5 specifications; 1985 Endeavour 35.5 Technical Specs. General Data about Endeavour 35.5. Brand: Endeavour: Model: 35.5: Boat Type: Sail: Category: Sloop: Year Of Production: 1985: Condition (New/Used) Pre ...
Yoshkar-Ola was established as a military fortress in 1584, following the Russian conquest of the Mari region.Yoshkar-Ola means "red city" in Mari and before 1919 was known as Tsaryovokokshaysk (Царевококшайск), between 1919 and 1927 also as Krasnokokshaysk (Краснококшайск) both after the Malaya Kokshaga River and is known as Charla (Чарла) amongst the Mari ...
Sergeev vs. Kokorev at Mari El Open Cup 2017 on Tapology. View Sergeev vs. Kokorev fight video, highlights, news, Twitter updates, and fight results.
The Mari El Republic - Overview. The Republic of Mari El is a federal subject of Russia located in the east of the European part of the country, in the Volga Federal District. Yoshkar-Ola is the capital city of the region. The population of Mari El is about 671,400 (2022), the area - 23,375 sq. km.
Al Sole, Yoshkar-Ola: See 24 unbiased reviews of Al Sole, rated 4.5 of 5 on Tripadvisor and ranked #18 of 162 restaurants in Yoshkar-Ola.