Reinforced Mast Step

[Just A Mom]

If you see this in an ad or it is mentioned by the seller is this a good thing? I understand what it is but would someone do this as a preventative measure or only because there was a problem? Isn't this a big thing to do - as in having to take the boat apart to do it?

 

[Rob Hair]

If you see this in an ad or it is mentioned by the seller is this a good thing? I understand what it is but would someone do this as a preventative measure or only because there was a problem? Isn't this a big thing to do - as in having to take the boat apart to do it?

I performed this operation on a 1984 Laser that I owned, though there was no sign of leakage or other problem. In my view, one would be foolish not to do this on an older boat. It's not hard to do and much, much easier than repairing the damage from a mast tube failure.

There is no need to take the boat apart. It can be done pretty easily by accessing the base via an inspection port located as has been described in several other posts.

 

[cskudder]

+1 to what Rob says.
From what I've heard + seen, it seems to me that the way that the older boats (I think before mid-90's) were built, that joint just was not as strong as it needed to be for the long haul. It often got really compromised further over time - - maybe by sailing forces, but certainly very much by water freezing in the mast hole over the years. Looking at the decks of old boats around here, MANY have obvious evidence of failure + repair. It's certainly also easy to "hear" that on this forum too. So I'm another guy who considers reinforcing the mast step a NECESSARY preventative step on any older boat. IMHO you're asking for a big problem to keep sailing them without doing it.

I realize that I kinda harp about all this, as a result of when my 1973 boat broke -

And I know I keep posting these old pics but I think a picture is worth a 1000 words on this.

I agree with Rob that the reinforcement is not real difficult, pretty easy if you're into this kind of stuff. Maybe 2-3 hours, maybe $50 in parts / materials, but I also realize that not everybody's gonna be happy to do it themself. On the other hand when it fails, then the repair job is way more time + money. Mine was like 20-30 hrs, and maybe $300. I'd guess it's the end of a lot of old boats cuz if you're not into doing it yourself, there's no way to make sense out of paying what it'd cost to get it done commercially.

So to your original question:
1- If I'm looking at an older boat, I would WANT one that's been reinforced before it broke.
2- I'd still buy an older boat that had not broken but was not reinforced, cuz I'm happy to do the job myself. But only if I can buy it for comparatively less, to make up for my time + money.
3- If an old boat had previously broken + was repaired, then I'd take a real careful look at the repair work. I'd want to be pretty darn sure that it was done well and the boat's not gonna break again. That joint carries HUGE shear force when the wind blows at all - I think like in range of 1000 lbs, rather than 100, as a very rough guesstimate.

Just one guy's view based on my own experience. YMMV.