• Welcome to this website/forum for people interested in the Morgan 38 Sailboat. Many of our members are 'owners' of Morgan 38s, but you don't need to be an owner to Register/Join.

Revisit of "Fatal Flaw"

P

phboujon

Philippe Boujon
<div>Hi All,

I don't particularly like the title of the thread "Fatal Flaw" (no flaw is fatal, a solution is always possible) but since it has been referred as such in the past, in the archives, I'll continue the tradition.

My fiancee and I have been working hard to refit our Morgan 382. We have done lots of work to the anchor well and anchor locker, and will soon be moving to the mast/mast step area.

Our boat (hull #161, 1979) seems to have the documented issue of the sinking IGU, about 1/2" separation between the cabin sole and the head/shower sole. Interestingly, our boat doesn't have any access hatches on either side of the mast bucket, and we wonder whether it was ever recalled and repaired by Morgan.

Additionally, we have noticed distortions in the outside of the hull at the locations where the ends of the short wooden beams supporting the mast bucket meet the hull, as if the ends of the wood beams are being gradually pushed through the hull.

We would therefore like to find out whether the boat was repaired by Morgan, and add reinforcement anyway to slow the sinking of the IGU.

I have read all the archives, and cataloged in the attached document past discussions about the "fatal flaw", but I am still unclear as to what repairs were done by Morgan during the recall? Would anyone be able to explain what the repairs were, and maybe provide pictures of the repairs on their boat?

Then, my understanding is that the sinking of the IGU can be slowed down with various methods that includes tying the mast step to the deck, or the mast to the deck? I would really appreciate if those of you who have created such fittings can describe what was done and/or send pictures, so that I can re-create it myself.

Thanks in advance!

Cheers
Philippe
http://sailing.mcabou.com/


View attachment Fatal_Flaw_of_Morgan_382-17662.unk

Fatal Flaw of Morgan 382.docx
</div>
 
Philippe: I have hull 163. The major reported problem on earlier boats was that the aft head bulkhead was not glassed properly or at all to the hull. The inner glass unit (IGU)for the main cabin ends at that bulkhead. The repair, I think, required cutting a rectangular hole aft of the head bulkhead to get access. My head bulkhead, appears to have been properly glassed without any later repair, although the access points seems to have been opened. On my boat, however, there appears to have been another problem, of the sort you are describing. The IGU contains the mast bucket. On my boat, the bucket does not sit all the way down on the lead. there is several inches gap. To prevent sinking of the bucket, ( I think) there were access points created in the sole on each side of the mast, just aft of the bucket. It looks to me as if they then put some gunk, caulking compound under the mast bucket, between it and the lead keel. they also installed some extra tabbing on the aft end of the bucket somehow, and for the life of me I don't remember what it tabs to. It has been a long time since I pulled things apart. The top of the keel/bilge perhaps. Not very far aft of the bucket, remember is the fiberglass tank which is, I believe, part of the IGU. I do not have any short wooden beams below the bucket, as I recall, and certainly nothing distorting the hull. (If you can see the short wooden beams sitting on the keel, you must have access to look down under the bucket? How do you do that?) Anyway, whatever they did on my boat is not fully successful and the bucket has sunk a little bit over the years--I can see it pulling the sole down a bit next to the mast. Not enough to break any tabbing--at most 1/8 inch and perhaps not even that much. I measured a few years ago and cannot remember. It wasn't easy to measure or estimate. I just live with it because all boats move and settle a bit as they age and I saw no good way to effect a repair.
On the other hand, if you are seeing distortions in the hull and if the sinking is up to 1/2", it sounds as if you have a more significant problem. I would not know what to recommend; a good naval architect or boat builder might. Remember if you decide to cut access points to look, the fuel tank is down there too, so be careful.
Finally, I have a small turnbuckle that angles from my mast below deck up to the deck a few inches behind the mast. Above that point, I have a strong point to attach the vang. I did this just to back the vang, but it also ties the deck down at that point, of course. The Morgan folks saved money by not tabbing the top of the bulkheads to the deck unit, which would have been a good idea I cannot see tying the mast to the deck being a solution to the sinking bucket. It would just pull the deck down with it. The bucket sinks because of the immense pressure of the cap shrouds, trying to push the mast through the bottom of the boat. Good luck. Please let us all know what you discover and decide to do.
 
Philippe: If you have a covered hole b elow the shower seat Morgan has been there. After Morgan did 2 repairs on "Vixen" I still had the problem. I re-glassed everthing in the head forward wall using marine plywood at the foot. This was thru bolted to the aft area of the head wall, removed the teak there and put it back in to cover these bolts. I also drilled a hole thru the mast for a 5/8" bolt and had an alluminum plate fabricated to fit it. It sits over the Morgan rubber gromit which serves as the mast partners. Pictures I don't have but if beat on me hard I can probably figure something out. I believe the mast plate was suggested by Brewer.

Dick
 
<div>Terry, Dick,

Thanks for your answers!

Dick, there is indeed a hatch below the shower seat. I'll look inside it more closely tomorrow. When you mean the head forward wall, do you speak of the wall separating the head from the forward berth? I didn't even look whether this is tabbed properly. I'll check.

The tabbing that separated from the hull is the one on the aft head bulkhead (between main cabin and head) on the side of the head. I cannot confirm yet what of the tabbing on the main cabin side as I can't see it. I planned to put new tabbing using 1708. Is there a concern doing this while on the hard (i.e. the boat not having its perfect shape)? I have great access right now that the thru-hulls/seacocks and plumbing is removed.

Terry, the short wooden beams I am referring to are not sitting on the keel, but are extending from the forward flanges of the mast bucket, and may support part of the cabin sole too. I am seeing one looking down underneath the head sink (I removed the floor there already), and I am assuming there is a similar one on the starboard side. I'll take pictures tomorrow to show better what I mean. The distortion is still minimal, you cannot 'see' it, but you can 'feel' it running your hand on the hull, like a hard bump.

I'll also confirm exactly what I mean by "sinking" with a picture. I may be looking at the wrong thing and getting myself worried for nothing, but it looks to me like the gap between the cabin sole and the head/shower sole isn't natural.

Dick, if I understand well your mast/deck fitting, there is an aluminium ring sitting over the rubber grommet, and a 5/8" bolt goes through that ring, then the mast at that location (at deck level). So, basically the mast is bolted to the deck?

Thanks again for the information. I really appreciate it. I'll get some pictures this weekend to help explain what I am seeing.

John, I uploaded the file in a PDF format.


View attachment Fatal_Flaw_of_Morgan_382-17666.pdf

Fatal Flaw of Morgan 382.pdf
</div>
 
Dick, thanks for the info. What hull is Vixen? I have never looked at the forward bulkhead of the head. the head wall, of course, is the glass unit for the head itself. there is then a forward bulkhead for the forecastle. I have the opening under the shower seat, and use the area for stowaage. So, did you glass the head unit to the hull or the plywood bulkhead? I cannot picture what you did with the extra wood and the bolts. And I do not understand the thing about the mast partners. I don't have a rubber grommet. I have a metal oval sitting on deck through which the mast runsand my mast is "partnered" with the spartite system. Are you saying that somehow the deck is now holding some of the mast pressure? I am not good at computer pictures, either, but perhaps you can find a youngster to post something or just as good, draw us a picture and post that or send it to me by email.
Thanks so much. adavida38@hotmail.com
 
Philippe,

My boat had the Morgan fix plus some pretty robust additions after. No sinking of cabin sole after 31 years. I also cut the inspection covers in the sole for a look see. I'll send you pics or info if you think it will help. Email me at rover467@yahoo.com and I'll send info if you would like.
 
I my opinion, no repairs can be done unless the boat is on the hard with all tension removed from the shrouds and probably, with the mast removed. Beyond that, it would be investigating where the drop is. That is difficult to say without access to the bulkhead and inspection to the mast step. One issue is over tensioning the rig and forcing the mast downward, applying greater forces to the makeup of ??? under the mast step and the possible bad glassing of the bulkhead both port and stbd. of the mast. Morgan attempted to add matting but in some cases, it may not have bonded to the existing and separated or not carried far enough aft or foward in the head or stbd locker area. in other words, inspection is needed.

The question is, "Is this "fatal" or something to monitor over time?" Every owner has to make that decision. I had heard that the issue is more prevalent in 6 foot draught boats. With those, the area under the mast step is greater with the possibility of more depression. Again, a guess!

I would recommend not over-tensioning the rig to reduce downward forces on the already very heavy mast.

Jim
 
"Vixen" is hull # 74 of the 38-2 series purchased new by me in 1978. The bulkhead I refer to in my earlier post is under the sink in the head and I am refering to the for and aft sections of this unit. Morgan's work included re-tab ing under the head seat, which tells you they were in there as this plate was not there when they were new. There is much in the archives on this subject. This was started by a John English from San Francisco after a 6 Ft'er came back from a Trans-Pac back beat-up at that time.(Late 70's). Jim is correct, this work should be done on the hard, mast out. You can reach me at dickkilroy@comcast.net if you wish or continue this here, your choice

Dick
 
Jim, I agree, and we are pulling the mast next week. I am also going to measure to current rig tension as I am curious whether it is indeed too much. I'll do that tomorrow.

Dick, if you don't mind, it's best to continue here as I may not be the only one who isn't fully understanding what repairs were made, and how to strengthen that area. I found John English's post, and all answers (many which I have cataloged into the pdf document earlier attached), but all those issues may have been fresher to the postees then and it's hard to follow for a newcomer to the Morgan 382 like me.

Dick, if like Terry suggested you can attempt to draw what the aluminium mast/deck fitting is that would be great. You can either post it here or send it by email at phboujon@gmail.com

As you pointed out, I have tabbing under the head seat. This can be seen from under the head sink, looking forward at the head seat area and from the access under the shower seat looking aft. While the tabbing under the shower seat is ok, the one under the sink separated like the tabbing of the aft head bulkhead (the one between the main cabin and the head). I'll be repairing both with 1708 once the mast is out. At least, I feel better knowing that Morgan repaired the boat, even if it later failed.

As far as the "sinking" of the IGU or cabin sole in my boat, could you all look at the pictures at:

https://picasaweb.google.com/phboujon/20110618SinkingIGU?feat=directlink

(Let me know if this works, there are 7 pictures. If it doesn't work, I'll resize and post them here).

You can comment directly at the pictures or here.

Basically, I am unsure whether the separations are due to the sinking of the IGU/mast step or are something else? I'll see how those measurements change next week when the mast is out.

By the way, mine is 5ft draft.

Thanks again for your comments.

Cheers
Philippe
 
philippe: thanks so much for posting these pictures. It helps understand the situation. Dick, I know it is a bother but if you could take pictures of what was done on Vixen it would be great. This will surely provoke me to go look harder at what is happening on Adavida. I thought that the head unit was separate from the bulkheads and tabbed to the hull somehow. I have to admit I never quite understood exactly how the whole head unit is attached to the boat. But the head unit has nothing to do with the mast support, as best I can tell. In fact, I don't really see how the head aft bulkhead has anything to do with mast support. I should be tabbed well, of course, but the mast is supported by the mast bucket and whatever supports that. Am I correct?
As I recall John English was a very unhappy guy, with major hull damage to his Morgan. No one else I have heard had the same problems, but Philippe seems to have a significant issue here. I am sure it can be repaired, but it may require some disassembly to get to the problem. That is the disadvantage of the internal glass units and, in our case, the big head assembly that sits in the boat like a box.
 
I feel the head aft bulkhead is part of a system supporting the mast. Here is the picture looking underneath the head sink with more info to what was tabbed on my boat (I removed the wood floor mostly but the white piece you see remaining)

The head aft bulkhead was tabbed to the hull (and this tabbing separated from the hull). However this same tabbing was covered by another that extended down into the mats bucket depression. Finally, this same tabbing was also extending with another layer onto the wooden beam that support the mast bucket flange and cabin sole.

So, on my boat, it seems the head/shower unit actually stayed in place BUT the mast bucket/IGU was pushed down by the mast which is why the tabbing of the head aft bulkhead separated from the hull.

So, my biggest problem is to slow down that sinking. Beside what Jim suggested to be careful about rigging tension, I need to find a way to tie the mast bucket/IGU to something to stop that sinking. That's why I am investigating Dick solution of the mast tied at the partners or Jim solution of a rode going down between the deck and bucket.



17669.jpg
 
I get it now. thanks. I wonder if the wooden beams were part of the fix. I now know what to be looking for as I inspect better. I do know the "wooden floor" under the sink on my boat was pretty rough, not like other parts of the the interior. I have made a new "floor" there, that sits over the old messy surface. Again, thank for letting us all see the situation so well. Keep us informed. And good luck.
 
The head/shower is a two piece unit that is not structural and was dropped in after the hulls were joined together and before the deck was added. The issue is at the bulkhead between the salon and forward area beyond the mast, both port and stbd. That is the strongest tied section of the boat.
Jim
 
Just to chip another voice in here, Hull #002 (ex-CHRISTALEAH from Niantic CT, now COURANTE in Annapolis MD) was visited in 1982 by the Morgan field team, and they performed the mods described in this thread,adding roving and new floors around the mast step area, fore and aft as well as thwartships. I never looked in the head under the shower seat, but will do so. I will also look for the separated main bulhead which I hope to NOT see. I do know that as years passed, the upper stays seemed to get longer each Spring when I brought them up to tension, and I noticed a crack appeared above the bulhead that supports the door to the forepeak; from the changes to the finish in the teak you can see that the whole deck is either 1/4" higher, or the boat is 1/4" deeper. Might be closer to 5/16".

I hope it's not fatal but when I next go aboard I will be looking for the failure points discussed here. I don't think there is or ever was a space between the bottom of the mast bucket and the keel-- that would be a dumb place for a space. Maybe it was there and is gone now, and that made my stays longer.

I suppose a turnbuckled tie-rod going from the deck just aft of the mast down into the keel would be a good thing to combat some of these issues, but I am not sure when I am getting around to it...or how the bottom end would be terminated. I am not keen to rip up the floor.

Related but slightly off-topic, I was told a story by the previous owner that the early boats had the chainplates terminated on deck (huh??) and that the SST straps running to the interior bulheads were added later, as the deck started to pull up. I sort of don't believe this. But on the port side just in front of the head, a special deck tie-in was made, wherein a 2"x 2" piece of teak is through-bolted to the deck vertically, and through bolted horizontally to the bulkhead in front of the shower stall. So somebody decided that deck moved or the bulkhead needed to be attached there. This does look like it was an afterthought. Do other boats have this little "deck beam" visible in the forepeak?

These boats do have some personality.
 
All, I measured my rig tension yesterday using a borrowed Loos gauge.

Unfortunately, I forgot my writings at the boat and it's pouring today in Deltaville, however from memory (I'll correct those numbers later):
- Lower aft shrouds ~ 600-700 lbs
- Lower fwd shrouds ~ 1600-1700 lbs
- Upper shrouds ~ 1800 lbs

According to Loos, the 'suggested initial settings' are 1300 lbs for 5/16 1x19 shrouds. While I am taking those 'suggested settings' with a grain of salt, it seems my Lower aft shrouds may be under tensioned, but the others may be ok. Hard to say though as I have no way to compare it to another 382.

Dick, regarding your aluminium ring,I have attempted to render a poor drawing of what it may be. I used a picture of my own partners as I just removed the boot.


17672.jpg


The aluminium ring is thru-bolted through the mast, however does it sits unbolted on top of the partners (i.e. it can move up with the mast, but not down since blocked by the deck)? Does it sits on top of the current aluminium ring that is containing the rubber grommet and used to tie the mast boot?

Jim, from an earlier post, you described that instead you had a rod going from the deck to the mast step, next to the mast. Could you described how you attached it to the mast step and the deck? Thanks in advance!
 
Philippe, if misery loves company - I spent some quality time replacing the head discharge hose. I noticed the bulkhead to hull tabbing had delam'd from the teak bulkhead. 383 with a build date 11/82.

How are you getting these pictures? Have you opened up the glass panel below the sink? (I was cursing the builder's lack of head hose access this weekend).
Dave
 
Philippe: What is that big bolt in your mast above the partners?

Dave: I gain access to the area under the head sink and drain board because my head unit has a big cutout outboard of the cabinet door, just aft of the toilet. I don't know if it was original or done by a previous owner, but it is very convenient. I would never have been able to plumb in my Lectra San (which sits on a shelf behind the toilet, enclose in teak) without that access.

I am happy to report (but it does not reduce my sympathy for others) that althugh I have seen a very slight downward tendency in the bucket and/or cabin sole by the bucket, all tabbing is firm and there are no cracks or major problems. Nonetheless, I will monitor it and if others figure out a way to reinforce the area, I may follow suit. We are all still hoping Dick Kilroy can share some pictures.
 
Dave, I agree it's a pain to access those hoses. I am able with a lot of bending and cursing to get my arms and shoulders through the teak door under the head sink.
That's how I was able to remove all the plumbing and use the angle grinder to remove the failed tabbing. I also have the cut out behind the head that Terry described.

Terry, the bolt was to attach two wires holding a shackle for a soft boom vang. I plan to install a rigid boom vang instead. As far as the bent fitting seen on the right, it was to attach blocks for the two reefing lines. I will also install something different.
I am happy to hear you didn't find much sinking on your boat!
 
Guy's Two things have happended up here in New England, we went sailing and the weather has gone to hell. I am not ignoring you. When I can get some pictures I will post with more comments. I also had a complete failure of my house power, while out sailing. A wire that looks like a phone cord fell off the engine screw on connection and caused all house power to die. still had the engine.

Dick
 
Dick -

That "phone cord" wire (spiral bound) is the ground to the engine block for the batteries. It was a small gauge wire that I replaced with a thicker gauge. Mine ran from the engine block just to starboard of the transmission to a small terminal post on the bulkhead underneath the engine access panel in the quarter-berth. A separate wire runs back to the battery. Not sure why that would kill the house power, though.
 
Dick, no worries! Any info you can provide would be great. I contacted Ted Brewer too but he didn't recall the solutions, so I am basically on my own to fix & reinforce the area.

We un-stepped the mast this Wednesday, and the yard guys were surprised of the tension of the shrouds.

Here arethe exact measurements I got from Loos gauge before un-stepping:
- Lower aft shrouds: 740 lbs Strb; 680 lbs Port
- Lower fwd shrouds: 1600 lbs Strb; 1700 lbs Port
- Upper shrouds: 1500 lbs Strb, 1300 lbs Port

After un-stepping the mast, the cabin floor and mast bucket raised about 1/4", so instead to have a 1/2" sinking, I now have 1/4". It's better, but I still want to dampen the mast pumping and reinforce the area.

Also, with the mast down, I went ahead and sanded under the head sink. I found more failed tabbing. Here is the final result in picture:


17682.jpg


I plan to replace all failed tabbing, tab over the crack in the bucket, then tab the bucket side to the bulkhead and to the stringer supporting it. Then I plan to also tab between the two stringers. My goal is to stiffen the entire area.

Then, I'll add a collar and thru-bolt to dampen the mast pumping. I'd like to also add a rode between the bucket and mast but I still do not understand how to do so.

Cheers
Philippe
 
Phillepe: Tryed to get pictures at the head, took 2 wih a Cannon EOS and they didn't come out, the flash worked, so tomorrow will try again with more light. Under the head I had what you had, grinded it all out, used woven roving higher and deeper than Morgan did then placed the plywood against the roving on the bulkhead glassed it in then did the bolt thing thru this. On the mast piese all it is is an alluminum piece shaped to the mast section with two horns shsped to catch the thru bolt. At this place I have a piece of tire tube cut and glued to cover the area held in place with 2 large hose clamps, this is then covered with a piece of sunbrela held by velcro to match my dodger. Mast doesn't leak.


Dick

Dick
 
If you will bear with me, I still am not sure what is going on here. Is the mast bucket or the internal glass unit attached to the aft head bulkhead? If so, how? I am not sure I have been able to see that attachment. the aft bulkhead problem may be separate from the bucket problem. In my "morgan fix" they also seem to have opened up on each side of mast and glassed the bucket to the lower inside hull along the sides or aft part of the bucket, as I recall. I haven't opened it for years. My tabbing is all firm, even though there appears to be a slight movement down of the bucket. It seems to me if the mast is supported at all by the cabin top, the top will simply sink if it takes much pressure.
 
Dick, regarding your mast piece, can you confirm whether it stops the mast only when pumping down but not up vs. a tie-down system (like Papeche in the Morgan 382 gallery) that tie the mast to the deck? I am trying to consider the pros & cons of both solutions since I have to implement one or the other.


Terry, on my boat, the mast bucket is supported by the thinner wooden beam shown on the picture. This wooden beam had a tabbing going to the hull, and the hull was also tabbed to the aft head bulkhead. All those tabbing failed and separated from the hull. The mast bucket and its beam then started to sink (in my opinion). On my boat, there is however no direct tabbing between the bucket and the hull like you describe. It wouldn't hurt to do that as well.

Therefore, I feel that if I tabbed the bucket to the hull, and create a stronger reinforcement between the bucket and aft head bulkhead (and possibly same on the starboard side), I may be able to stop the sinking.

I am still considering what exactly to do while I work on replacing the standing rigging.

Cheers
Philippe
 
I will take some pics from my boat as well. Mine was tabbed but the glass has separated a bit in one spot.
Does anyone know if other or all boat suffer from this "flexing"?
The tension on the headstay and backstay is like standing on a jump rope and holding each end with you (the mast) in the middle.
 
The problematic tension I believe are the shrouds. This tension grows dramatically when sailing beyond a beam reach.

The tabbing must be done correctly by grinding out the old and through proper preparation, then over-lapping multiple layers of glass mat joining the bulkhead to the hull both fore and aft sides. I would also do this repair after the boat has "rested" on the hard for at least a week, with well placed hull supports placed on each side or on the bulkhead. I believe John English thought the problem was in the buildup of glass/lead under the mast bucket. In a 6 foot draught boat, this distance is greater that a 5 foot boat. The verdict is out on that but my opinion is the tabbing along the centerline(port/stbd), bulkhead is the problem and Morgan had the right plan but may have been done differently, or not at all, on individual boats.

One question would be, do 383 and 4s have the same problem or is it only to 382s and some 383s?

The final question would be, is this a real problem that an owner should lose sleep over? I don't think so but I would certain monitor any drop in the sole and inspect the bulkhead tabbing and retabb where needed.

Just another opinion from one sailors "wall of wisdom".

Jim
 
To all : Njord is 1 of the last 384s built. She does not have this problem. According to pete brown morgan solved the problem by removing the mast
bucket. There is more information on this subject in the newsletters.

Jay
 
The mast bucket is nothing more than a FG or plastic formed container the mast sits in. It has no structural component to this issue. It goes beyond what the mast sits in. Just my opinion.
 
Good point. Now I wonder, what is its function?? Oh I know, it holds up the floor boards surrounding the mast. Thus, bucket sinks, floor sinks
 
Jay
When you say "There is more information on this subject in the newsletters."
What newsletters? Is there a link?
 
To all: Sorry for the vague note. I sent it from my phone. Pete was the production manager for this boat. Again according to Pete, Morgan intended for the mast to be supported by the bucket. The bucket is part of the internal glass unit (IGU). The area between the underside of the bucket and the top of the keel was supposed to be filled with granite dust mixed into catalyzed resin. Unfortunately, that didn't always happen. Without the support of the keel, the mast drove the bucket and IGU downward. I suspect that as the IGU began to distort that the tabbing began to fail. Isn't that the way things go?

On Njord, Morgan cut the bucket out of the IGU and stepped the mast directly onto the keel. They also added 800 lbs of glass and resin. The 382s were listed as displacing 17,200 lbs. The 384s were 18,000 lbs.

The article is in one of the last newsletters published. My memory is that it is Spring 1997. It is titled True Draft. When I interviewed Pete for this article he was working as a marine surveyor. If you doubt what I am relaying to you here, I suggest you try to contact Pete. He was easy to approach.

Regards Jay
 
Jay, would you have Pete contact information? I already spoke with Ted Brewer but since it is really a matter of how Morgan built the boats, I'd like to ask Pete's opinion on how I can fix the problem on my boat.

Thanks in advance
Philippe
 
If the IGU is removed and the mast stepped directly on the keel, you have shorten the rig by lowering the mast. This would be greater on a 6 foot draught model. If the IGU is the issue, and over 30+ years it has not moved much, if at all, perhaps the answer is insert a form of shim or spacer under the bucket. But the stringers supporting sole may have to be reworked.

I have never heard of the a difference in displacement between a 382/3 and 384 unless it is due to a factor other than the keel. Even the 6 foot draught models had the same amount of ballast. I do know that early boats had lead in the bow and later did not.

Jim
 
Sorry Philippe, I've discarded his phone number. You may find him on Google.

Jim. My owner manual indicates that Njord (384 five foot draft) displaces 18,000. I have a brochure for a 382 that states it displaces 17,200. Pete told me that after the problems with the mast step they began adding more fiberglass in the area we are discussing to help strengthen it. He couldn't remember specifically when but thought it was somewhere during production of the 383 series.

Jay
 
Hi Jay, I am saying that Morgan did address the issue both in production and repairs to existing boats. But I am hard pressed to believe that the referred to 800# figure is the production repair.

What is probably impossible to do is to directly compare the area in question of a 382 and a 384. I also believe this issue is not a "fatal flaw" but more of cosmetic imperfection. I think Morgan did correct repair in the field but the original glass tabbing did not bond correctly to the new or not enough was used. These are still fine boats and sailing for 30 plus years!
Jim
 
Fair enough. I didn't intend to render an opinion on the boats or the repair made to them but rather, relay information from the most reputable source on the issue that I have discovered.

My apologizes if that's how I came accross.

Jay
 
No apologies needed! I just don't want others, non Morgan owners, to think this is a reason not to purchase this great boat.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top