New member; question about the "dreaded beam" issue

I don't currently own a Cal, but I'm seriously shopping for a well-built boat with decent performance in the 27-30 foot range, and the Cal 2-27 and 2-29 are both on my short list. I've read all I can find online about the steel beam issue in the 29' and larger Cals, and I find myself asking a perhaps heretical question: Even if the beam is rusted out, is it really necessary to repair it at all? I understand that the beam is, by Lapworth's design, an integral structural member of the boat, and reason would dictate that, as such, it should need to be replaced if it has deteriorated. I get the logic of that. But I also have to suspect that there a great many older Cals sailing around, probably with rusted-out beams, with no obvious evidence of stuctural weakness. I say this because because I've looked at two 2-29s locally, and neither of the owners had ever heard of the beam issue. This leads me to believe that there are a lot of other Cal owners who sail their boats regularly and may have no idea that their boat may have a rusted out beam. And yet there don't seem to be any reports of dismastings or chainplate or bulkhead failures in these boats despite the apparently widespread prevalence of rusted out beams. Is it possible, at least for the 29s, that the boat is strong enough without the beam, that the bulkhead structure by itself is enough to carry the load? Any naval architects out there who care to weigh in on this? I guess this is an issue for me because I find myself looking at boats that I would otherwise be very excited about buying, but I'm reluctant because of the likely need to undertake a major structural repair. So I find myself wondering if the repair is really necessary. David B.

David, The beam is an essential and integral part of the boat's structure, the mast goes down and the shrouds tie to the bulkheads and pull up, and the steel beam holds, and ties the mast pressure downward with the plywood bulkheads pulling up, or down, or both. And yes, there are cases of catastrophic failure-according to the guys who worked in the factory, are engineers, and know how the boat's built. The thing is, the Cal 29 is such a fine sailing boat that the repair would be well worth doing; but it may be that the beam in most boats is still strong enuff that the boats are still safe. In my boat, the shrouds are glassed into the hull's structure instead of the bulkhead, which is good but it makes the sheeting of the jib/Genoa troublesome for the #3 working jib. It means going up wind I have to thread the sheets inside , or the middle mains. I tell me XO, "out-in=out". I guess it's the middle mains, then. The number two and three sheets, happily, outside the shrouds. Woohoo! Let's go sailing! Any Classic 24's out there? Love to hear from you. Jerry Sobel, Shpritz Cal 24 Mk-1, the original "California 24" kit boat; #71 From: David <db… [at] yahoo.com> To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 7:56 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] New member; question about the "dreaded beam" issue I don't currently own a Cal, but I'm seriously shopping for a well-built boat with decent performance in the 27-30 foot range, and the Cal 2-27 and 2-29 are both on my short list. I've read all I can find online about the steel beam issue in the 29' and larger Cals, and I find myself asking a perhaps heretical question: Even if the beam is rusted out, is it really necessary to repair it at all? I understand that the beam is, by Lapworth's design, an integral structural member of the boat, and reason would dictate that, as such, it should need to be replaced if it has deteriorated. I get the logic of that. But I also have to suspect that there a great many older Cals sailing around, probably with rusted-out beams, with no obvious evidence of stuctural weakness. I say this because because I've looked at two 2-29s locally, and neither of the owners had ever heard of the beam issue. This leads me to believe that there are a lot of other Cal owners who sail their boats regularly and may have no idea that their boat may have a rusted out beam. And yet there don't seem to be any reports of dismastings or chainplate or bulkhead failures in these boats despite the apparently widespread prevalence of rusted out beams. Is it possible, at least for the 29s, that the boat is strong enough without the beam, that the bulkhead structure by itself is enough to carry the load? Any naval architects out there who care to weigh in on this? I guess this is an issue for me because I find myself looking at boats that I would otherwise be very excited about buying, but I'm reluctant because of the likely need to undertake a major structural repair. So I find myself wondering if the repair is really necessary. David B.

Dave, I have a Cal 9.2 (30ft) for sale in the Detroit (Lake St Clair) area. Would love for you to see it if not to far away. Nick From: "David" <db… [at] yahoo.com> To: "Cal Boats" <Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 10:56:12 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] New member; question about the "dreaded beam" issue I don't currently own a Cal, but I'm seriously shopping for a well-built boat with decent performance in the 27-30 foot range, and the Cal 2-27 and 2-29 are both on my short list. I've read all I can find online about the steel beam issue in the 29' and larger Cals, and I find myself asking a perhaps heretical question: Even if the beam is rusted out, is it really necessary to repair it at all? I understand that the beam is, by Lapworth's design, an integral structural member of the boat, and reason would dictate that, as such, it should need to be replaced if it has deteriorated. I get the logic of that. But I also have to suspect that there a great many older Cals sailing around, probably with rusted-out beams, with no obvious evidence of stuctural weakness. I say this because because I've looked at two 2-29s locally, and neither of the owners had ever heard of the beam issue. This leads me to believe that there are a lot of other Cal owners who sail their boats regularly and may have no idea that their boat may have a rusted out beam. And yet there don't seem to be any reports of dismastings or chainplate or bulkhead failures in these boats despite the apparently widespread prevalence of rusted out beams. Is it possible, at least for the 29s, that the boat is strong enough without the beam, that the bulkhead structure by itself is enough to carry the load? Any naval architects out there who care to weigh in on this? I guess this is an issue for me because I find myself looking at boats that I would otherwise be very excited about buying, but I'm reluctant because of the likely need to undertake a major structural repair. So I find myself wondering if the repair is really necessary. David B.

Thanks for all the responses. It helps me to frame my thoughts as I look at the various boats available. Nick, sorry, but I can't travel that far. Best of luck, though. David B. --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, ngeisz741@... wrote: > > > > Dave, I have a Cal 9.2 (30ft) for sale in the Detroit (Lake St Clair) area. Would love for you to see it if not to far away. > > > > Nick > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "David" <dblakey43@...> > To: "Cal Boats" <Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 10:56:12 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] New member; question about the "dreaded beam" issue > >  > > > > > I don't currently own a Cal, but I'm seriously shopping for a well-built boat with decent performance in the 27-30 foot range, and the Cal 2-27 and 2-29 are both on my short list. I've read all I can find online about the steel beam issue in the 29' and larger Cals, and I find myself asking a perhaps heretical question: Even if the beam is rusted out, is it really necessary to repair it at all? I understand that the beam is, by Lapworth's design, an integral structural member of the boat, and reason would dictate that, as such, it should need to be replaced if it has deteriorated. I get the logic of that. But I also have to suspect that there a great many older Cals sailing around, probably with rusted-out beams, with no obvious evidence of stuctural weakness. I say this because because I've looked at two 2-29s locally, and neither of the owners had ever heard of the beam issue. This leads me to believe that there are a lot of other Cal owners who sail their boats regularly and may have no idea that their boat may have a rusted out beam. And yet there don't seem to be any reports of dismastings or chainplate or bulkhead failures in these boats despite the apparently widespread prevalence of rusted out beams. Is it possible, at least for the 29s, that the boat is strong enough without the beam, that the bulkhead structure by itself is enough to carry the load? Any naval architects out there who care to weigh in on this? > I guess this is an issue for me because I find myself looking at boats that I would otherwise be very excited about buying, but I'm reluctant because of the likely need to undertake a major structural repair. So I find myself wondering if the repair is really necessary. > > David B. >