MacGregorSailors.com

Seahouse

Thank for that advice. When I replaced the bolts I used a lot of sealant and gooped the hole and then pushed the bolts through. I used 3M 4200 (should it be 5200??) since the sealant on there come off relatively easily.

By the time i did all this, the boat had been out of the water for 10 days.

When I applied sealant from the inside, I did this in the middle of winter to stop the leak ( I wasn't using the boat then). Then once out of the water I did the above.

So then with the help of my admiral I made sure they were very tight. Is that what you would have done then? Possibly I should invest in a new plate?

I will re-check it in October when I pull her out to change the engine oil.

Thanks
Wandering

No real help to me as I have no clue as to what parameter your trying to apply the word soft to. The only soft vs hard reference I refer to is as one would judge its number on the Rockwell hardness scale. As in diamond "hard" gold "soft". Stainless steel is harder and more brittle than any of the other common steel fasteners. And adding a strength rating related to hardness is not related at all, their two totally different subjects. You do come up with some really off the wall statements sometimes though, I just hate to see some of your erroneous statements taken as gospel by some of the less knowledgeable members of the forum, as in the case of "Soft" stainless. Try drilling the heads off of a few 1/4" bolts, two stainless and two grade 5 steel, and you will see which is harder. As a rule when you see the addition of chromium added to an alloy in the percentages present in stainless you will automatically know it going to be very hard and brittle, when you see the addition of carbon added to an alloy you know the higher the percentage the softer it will be. Kinda like knife blades, high carbon steel blade is quick and easy to put a good edge on but due to softness will not last long, stainless blade is very hard to get good edge on but edge will last much longer. Hope this helps you..

Wandering -

Yes, you had not much choice but to put the sealant in from the inside when it was in the water. The tell-tale symptom of a softened transom from water ingress is the amount of, and ease of, compression of the hull/ transom when you snug up the nuts from the inside.

If the bolts snugged up nicely and felt tight, that's good. If the washers dug in easily, you could either substitute larger ones, or even a plate, (if there's room in there?) to spread the compressing load of the screws over a larger area. The size of the rudder mounting plate on the outside is large enough that you are less likely to see it "bite" in and penetrate the gelcoat (like at the edges), so it's probably fine as it is on the outside if you didn't see this.

If there is moisture in there, it would likely take longer than 10 days to dry out. Ideally, at some point you want to make sure that's it's dry (say, open it up and leave it open during dry storage season) in there to halt deterioration.

-B.

Couldn't help chuckling at the enjoyable and educational repartee between Raycarlson and Seahouse. Reminded me of a line from the movie, Jewel of the Nile: "Is good debate - is no winner".
For those of us who are not mechanically-minded a little argument between buddies who are can be very helpful.
Kittiwake

I am amused we are now witnessing an argument of soft versus hard between two guys

Nobody said they had a flacid rudder!

I always thought a high carbon steel blade was better at holding an edge? Then stainless. They have some fancy grades of stainless to try to increase it's edge holding. I do know that high grade SS can be a bear to machine!
Ix

Ixneigh wrote:I always thought a high carbon steel blade was better at holding an edge? Then stainless. They have some fancy grades of stainless to try to increase it's edge holding. I do know that high grade SS can be a bear to machine!
Ix

Precisely.
Note of course that you would not machine either type of steel in the hardened state, and that there are free-machining (ie. sulfur) grades available.

- B.

Before I post I have to insist that you two perverts above get your minds out of the gutter with the double-entendres!

No?

OK. I'm shocked and outraged, but I'll post anyway...

No real help to me as I have no clue as to what parameter your trying to apply the word soft to. The only soft vs hard reference I refer to is as one would judge its number on the Rockwell hardness scale. As in diamond "hard" gold "soft". Stainless steel is harder and more brittle than any of the other common steel fasteners. And adding a strength rating related to hardness is not related at all, their two totally different subjects. You do come up with some really off the wall statements sometimes though, I just hate to see some of your erroneous statements taken as gospel by some of the less knowledgeable members of the forum, as in the case of "Soft" stainless. Try drilling the heads off of a few 1/4" bolts, two stainless and two grade 5 steel, and you will see which is harder. As a rule when you see the addition of chromium added to an alloy in the percentages present in stainless you will automatically know it going to be very hard and brittle, when you see the addition of carbon added to an alloy you know the higher the percentage the softer it will be. Kinda like knife blades, high carbon steel blade is quick and easy to put a good edge on but due to softness will not last long, stainless blade is very hard to get good edge on but edge will last much longer. Hope this helps you..

Hey Ray -

That stainless steel screws are of a harder or stronger metal is a common misconception (among laymen)– we've heard it before. Thanks for confirming it. Hopefully that misconception has now ended here for anyone who might previously have held it.

It's interesting to note that, similar to fasteners, in testing, stainless steel anchors have been shown to be inferior in strength (shank bending- Practical Sailor) to their identical regular steel counterparts, because in those cases they were made to identical dimensions, when they should have been designed with increased dimensions and thickness in weak areas to compensate for the strength loss. If stainless were in fact stronger why would it be necessary to increase its thickness in these areas? Answer: because it's not stronger.

BTW – drilling, or “drillability” , is not an acceptable way to judge the hardness of a material. Have you ever tried drilling a deep hole in copper, for example? I have many times- it's a very difficult task, and yet copper is a soft material. The alloying elements are among a host of many other properties besides hardness that confound the determination of hardness, rendering such an unscientific pronouncement highly questionable.

I was pretty clear in stating that tensile and yield strength were my criteria for the judgement- mostly because the figures for these properties are available for any layman to understand and confirm in published data. Check it for yourself.

I must say I've never heard anyone say that regular steel high carbon steel knife blades are softer than stainless steel knife blades. Why? Quite simply, because it's not true. In the science of alloying, carbon content, and heat treatment of cutting edges, and as Ixneigh has found, the opposite is more frequently the case. Though technology is reducing (in some exotic cases reversing) the difference, stainless steel knives are a compromize of performance.

Contrary to your statement, carbon in steel is the element that is mostly responsible for its becoming hard (and not soft) during the heat treatment process, within limits, the higher the percentage of carbon present the harder it can be made. Basic metallurgy, that. Yet another misconception (that's three) with no basis in reality. However, don't underestimate the ability of other forum members to figure things out for themselves, I have found they are quite capable.

It might be possible (?) to find a high quality stainless steel knife material that takes an edge better than a low quality high carbon steel blade, but that would be the exception. I prefer to, and will continue to, confine my opinions to be within the realm of fact-based science. I would suggest you do the same – we would agree on a lot more things!

It's a good idea to consult a search engine for a trusted source if in doubt, though. Here's one knife site (among many, pick any) regarding the compromize... http://zknives.com/knives/kitchen/misc/ ... vscs.shtml

I quote from the author (a knife expert) halfway down the page...

“ Basically, to me Stainless vs. non-Stainless translates into easy maintenance vs. performance argument. Overall, for most of the non-exotic alloys, stainless steels are lesser performers compared to carbon counterparts, given similar composition, proper edge and equal cutting medium. However, if you have quality stainless steel, properly heat treated it is more than enough for the kitchen needs for majority of home users out there. If you strive for maximum performance then non-stainless, high Carbon steels are the way to go.”

The overriding message from my posts is that it's important to be aware that substituting stainless steel for regular or carbon steel in fasteners and other applications is trading shininess and corrosion resistance for diminished returns in other properties. Things can be more complicated than they appear at first. Stainless steel is not a panacea, it's a compromise.

Hope everybody's entertained – 'cause science can be fun – B.

“Arithmetic is not an opinion” - Old Italian Proverb.

I do have a couple of the knives made from some sort of fancy SS that's rusts very little and holds a decent edge. They seem to be brittle though. Titanium is rustproof but nearly useless as more then an occasional use blade. I don't like SS anchors because in cruising , I sometimes leave anchors down for weeks, and SS isn't going to like sitting in low oxygen mud somewhere. Same way with aluminum. What about titanium? Would that end the metal problems on boats once and for all? How about the hastalloys? There's got to be some metal that will go for the life of a boat without incident.

So far as machining hardened SS...well, that's what happens when you pick up odd bits to make some project with. It's already been treated for whatever it's intended use was, and now I come along and try to drill it, or cut it and it's impossible. I have two sections of tubing I used in my new sunshade that are so difficult to work, you practically can't using cordless tools which is all I keep aboard. Trying to drill a hole in the stuff was insane. I knew the tubing was good when I picked it up. Just felt good. The tubing i had to cut for my recent cockpit table, on the other hand, cut like butter.

Ix

I prefer not to address hard vs soft (concerning hardware) - instead, I look for strength, toughness, and corrosion resistance. Now, if someone would make hardware out of PH 17-4 I would be very pleased.

Wandering wrote:If it weren't for the sealant (3m 4200 I would guess) on the washer and the nut of the bolt on the inside, I could very well have sunk or filled up with water.

Just looked at my 2009 it is in a slip with ballast full. As far as I can see from the dock both rudders' brackets are above the water line. Is there part I can't see that is below water line

There you go, now we're changing our story. Please don't ad strength to the debate, I've never made any claim or statement whatsoever about strength, as previously acknowledged there is considerable more strength in carbon steel then stainless. And now your throwing heat treat into the debate which even an armchair scientist such as yourself is aware is an entirely result changing process that can make any alloy bend like lead or snap in two like a cracker, as in your knife blade analogy which is all due to heat treat, likely and amateur metallurgist probably would fail to make the connection. I realize your hobby is to play Bill Nye the science guy let everyone know how well versed you are technologically but this is a simple disagreement with your erroneous statement of stainless bolts being soft. Maybe the science guy could put down the tech journals and do a practical real world experiment like take a couple 1/4 inch bolts 3-4 inches long, one in Macgregor 304 stainless and the other grade 2-3 steel and put em in a vice and beat on them with a bfh the steel will bend the 304 will like crack in half. Or ask a welder what rod he would use on the blade of a bulldozer or teeth of a backhoe. It certainly won't be a high carbon steel rod but a very low carbon (.025%) high chromium (20%) rod in a process called hardfacing. this rod is almost a duplicate of a stainless alloy. And a big thankyou to all to all our fans out there for cheering us on, I'm glad we all can be entertained occasionally and have a good laugh, and there is no ill feelings intended, one just gets irritated occasionally. hull i'll probably be threatened with banishment from the forum by a moderator again............

There you go, now we're changing our story. Please don't ad strength to the debate, I've never made any claim or statement whatsoever about strength, as previously acknowledged there is considerable more strength in carbon steel then stainless. And now your throwing heat treat into the debate which even an armchair scientist such as yourself is aware is an entirely result changing process that can make any alloy bend like lead or snap in two like a cracker, as in your knife blade analogy which is all due to heat treat, likely and amateur metallurgist probably would fail to make the connection. I realize your hobby is to play Bill Nye the science guy let everyone know how well versed you are technologically but this is a simple disagreement with your erroneous statement of stainless bolts being soft. Maybe the science guy could put down the tech journals and do a practical real world experiment like take a couple 1/4 inch bolts 3-4 inches long, one in Macgregor 304 stainless and the other grade 2-3 steel and put em in a vice and beat on them with a bfh the steel will bend the 304 will like crack in half. Or ask a welder what rod he would use on the blade of a bulldozer or teeth of a backhoe. It certainly won't be a high carbon steel rod but a very low carbon (.025%) high chromium (20%) rod in a process called hardfacing. this rod is almost a duplicate of a stainless alloy. And a big thankyou to all to all our fans out there for cheering us on, I'm glad we all can be entertained occasionally and have a good laugh, and there is no ill feelings intended, one just gets irritated occasionally. hull i'll probably be threatened with banishment from the forum by a moderator again............

Ray-

We were comparing stainless steel to grade 5 to 8 screws (by your choice), so now we're down to grade 2 or 3 ? Waivering on your position, seeing the light, or is that a typo?

I'm afraid that my 8 years of post-secondary eduction has left me rather not qualified as an “armchair scientist”. So again, you are saying something that you know nothing about.

I don't have to consult a welder, because I am one. I have personally hardfaced construction equipment, mining and road milling equipment, and tool and forge die wear surfaces using stick, TIG (for finer surfacing) and specialized spray welding techniques.

I stated that stainless is soft to the original post in the context that the seized 1/4” bolts could be easily twisted off to remove them. I presented fact -based evidence and ready reference (tensile and yield strength) that backs that up. The fact stands. If you doubt that, go and buy 1/4” stainless bolts and try twisting them off (“torque”), and compare that to your stated 5 to 8 grade bolts. There will be your answer... no pipe on the wrench or socket handle is needed to snap them off.

Not quite sure what the issue, or your big deal about it is. You have presented no refuting evidence other than some cognitive dissonance and a convoluted run-on series of reversed facts about carbon that have no base in reality, and some unrelated nonsense about drilling, without any supporting references. Well, that's kind of OK, mistakes get made, but it's not OK to not correct them, to ignore them, and to then deflect by pointing fingers at others as having made it. Especially when you are the one who brought it up.

I have always been pleased and willing to help you or anyone or discuss something they want clarification on, or details of, in these forums. I, like most others here, aim to make constructive contributions, but if I get something wrong, I appreciate being corrected or logically discussing it; these forums can be a great way to broaden one's field of learning. There are experts as well as experienced salts in various fields on this forum that are willing to contribute and share their knowledge. And I reiterate that most forum readers here are quite capable of figuring out fact from fiction, and what applies to their particular situation.

But it is apparent that this is not what our conversation is about – you have left the realm of reasonable constructive technical discussion. You're insulting, and then follow with “and there is no ill feelings intended” (sic)... as if that makes it all OK! To be fair, I'll allow that maybe the offensive attitude is unintentional on your part, but it's there in your writing.

But such conduct is very much not OK. It appears as though you think that by tearing others down that it somehow builds you up, but the reverse is the case; the others are not torn down, it is you who are diminished.

Your inappropriate sarcasm about threatened repeat “banishings” by moderators (which is nothing to be proud of) is rude and disrespectful of the efforts of our moderators, who volunteer their own personal time to maintain this forum at the high standard that it is. While you might find it amusing, no one else does, and I would hazard a guess that moderators would rather spend their time doing something other than babysitting Ray.

Maybe in the future something as simple as maintaining some gentlemanly respect for other forum members and forum rules would lift your fears of said banishment. We are guests of this forum. I have been more than patient; unless you are willing to address me in a civil manner, I have nothing more to provide you, and I would appreciate it if you would please leave me alone.

- Brian.