I read on this Forum (so it must be true) that high-speed death rolls are often the cause of mast step failures. Hence, if you haven't done too many of those, I wouldn't worry.
From my observation, it's not necessary to do this type of preventative maintenance on boats since the 13**** series. The builders changed how the maststep was installed aound then and it's been virtually a non existant problem since then.
Can you elaborate on this assertion and provide technical information? If not, can you provide a source at Laser Performance? I have a friend who has a 139xxx vintage boat and we have been debating whether to put a port in for just this purpose.
The water test does one thing and one thing only - it tells you if the tube is leaking. It does not give you any indication as to the material condition of the wad of Bondo that was placed in the plywood piece that received the tube when the boat was assembled. It is a machanical joint which is subjected to a large amount of shear stress over time. In my limited experience, most boats that don't have at least one port are quite damp inside. The Bondo "donut" on the first boat I opened was soaked and felt like a hard wet sponge. It dried out over time and when I decided to reinforce the joint, I was shocked to find that I was able to pop it out quite easily with a screw driver. Now, with the tube firmly bonded to the inner hull with overlapping layers of epoxy and woven cloth that go out about 5" , I am far more confident in a blow because it is one less thing to worry about. FWIW, you can do what you want, but that's my 2 cents.Do the water test - full the step up with water and see if it stays full. If it isn't leaking, I would see no reason to mess with it.
From my observation, it's not necessary to do this type of preventative maintenance on boats since the 13**** series. The builders changed how the maststep was installed aound then and it's been virtually a non existant problem since then.
Aside from the lack of mildew, it looks like the traditional run-of-the-mill Bondo donut to me.Curious as to what you have observed that has changed, below is the maststep on a 179xxx series (built in 2004 by Vanguard in the US), to my eye it looks like the same method of installation, the bog slightly different perhaps ?
The water test does one thing and one thing only - it tells you if the tube is leaking. It does not give you any indication as to the material condition of the wad of Bondo that was placed in the plywood piece that received the tube when the boat was assembled. It is a machanical joint which is subjected to a large amount of shear stress over time. In my limited experience, most boats that don't have at least one port are quite damp inside. The Bondo "donut" on the first boat I opened was soaked and felt like a hard wet sponge. It dried out over time and when I decided to reinforce the joint, I was shocked to find that I was able to pop it out quite easily with a screw driver. Now, with the tube firmly bonded to the inner hull with overlapping layers of epoxy and woven cloth that go out about 5" , I am far more confident in a blow because it is one less thing to worry about. FWIW, you can do what you want, but that's my 2 cents.
The water test does one thing and one thing only - it tells you if the tube is leaking. It does not give you any indication as to the material condition of the wad of Bondo that was placed in the plywood piece that received the tube when the boat was assembled. It is a machanical joint which is subjected to a large amount of shear stress over time.
What this really boils down to is a cost benefit analysis and I think there's two categories people fall into, racers and cruisers.
If you're a cruiser and aren't racing competitively I'd 100% recommend this preventative maintenance if there's the slightest indication the mast tube bondo material is degrading . I'd also say the same for a practice boat for the serious racer or campaigner.
For individuals racing competitively the whole issue is more murky and requires more introspection. I'll contend if a maststep is to the point where the bondo material holding in the mast tube is degrading then there's a good chance that there's other issues with the boat. In particular I'd suspect such a boat would be soft and thus not very competitive. So my recommendation to a person in that position is not necessarily repair the maststep, but get a newer boat.
Some of the more serous racers in here could chime in on the following statement as I've been out of the Laser racing game for over 15 years. But I think at 60 races per year over 5 years is close to getting a boat past the ideal stiffness. The boat is probably still in good shape and could still fetch a good amount of money, I'd then save up the difference for a brand new boat and upgrade. My $.02
Reading this thread it would appear that Laser did not make design/process changes to address the mast step failure> comments appreciated.
As well can someone provide some pictures of some example inspection ports.
Thxs
I haven't really observed, just my understanding from discussions with the builder / dealers, that they made the whole thing far more secure making it unlikely that the more modern boats would ever fail. Think about how often the mast steps used to fail even in relatively new boats built more than 20 years ago compared to how often the boats built in the last 20 years mast steps fail, at least in my region I haven't heard of a single mast step failure in a boat built in the last 20 years.Curious as to what you have observed that has changed, below is the maststep on a 179xxx series (built in 2004 by Vanguard in the US), to my eye it looks like the same method of installation, the bog slightly different perhaps ?
View attachment 7239