Hi all,
I'm cleaning/rebedding my chainplates, and was considering using Spartite to fill in the space between the chainplate faces and the surrounding deck. Has anyone ever done this? Is this a bad idea? I still plan on using butyl on the chainplate covers to seal the hardware.
Thx!
Josh
—
Josh McElwee
Sailing from East Greenwich, RI
2000 C36 MKII, M35B, "Chinook", Hull#1900
I don't profess to be an expert but it would seem to me to be a waste of the product. I just redid my spar mast collar and seemed to me that the mixing instructions were pretty specific and there absolutely no give once it has set up. Seems like you would be better off with epoxy since it can be mixed in small batches, which spartite did is not designed to do. But it's your boat have a go and see how it works out
Mike Hogan
s/v Ciscocat #226
Mark I XP25, std rig
Checkout the how to export the chain plates post in this section.
Friend just did all his deck fittings with Butyl tape and was quite impressed with this method.
Jim
SV Illusion
2000 Catalina 36 MKII
Dunedin, Florida
2000 C36 MKII 1825
You actually want some space around the chain plate so you can pack it with butyl tape. If there not enough space then the butyl tape will have no place to go. The chain plates move considerably depending on the wind and waves.
Ross & Joanne
Wavelength
Saint John NB
RKYC
C36 #658 TR 1987
Whoa - your chainplates should certainly not move at all relative to the deck depending on wind and waves!
Spartite is not meant to be a waterproofing agent - it doesn not bond that well and it will make things hard to seal. As noted above, you need a cavity of some sort to get adequate surface area between your sealant, the deck, and the chainplate, regardless of your sealant.
The application I think you may be considering is using the spartite to fill in the core space around the chainplate, as you would otherwise do with epoxy or some such. I don't think this would be a good choice as it will not seal/bond that well in the cavity and you will certainly have a hell of a hard time gouging it back out later. The spar tite is too soft to grind with normal tools.
Jason V
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Just to clarify, hull deck moment is very small. Your deck is not attached to the main chain plates, they are attached to bulkheads. The lowers are attached to the deck but boats do flex, that is why we get leaks, that is why we can hear creaks and groans is a good sea. Butyl tape can compensate for those small movements that will crack anything rigid. :)
Ross & Joanne
Wavelength
Saint John NB
RKYC
C36 #658 TR 1987
Thanks all!
In this case, I was not intending to use the spartite to fill in the core space (would use epoxy for that). Was just thinking that the empty space around the chainplates seems excessive, and I wasn't sure that I could get the space fully-sealed using just butyl tape.
With the butyl, do you guys just cram as much of it down into into the space between the chainplates and deck as possible? Is that actually effective to create a waterproof seal? It would seem to be relatively imperfect, trying to stuff rolled up butyl into that void. I would guess that all of the actual sealing in that case is done by the butyl that sits just under the chainplate covers (ie, the the top 'gasket' you create).
My thought with the spartite was to just fill in the bottom 1/2 to 2/3 of the pocket, then use butyl to fill in the rest using the normal protocol. But, it sounds like this might be a wasted effort, and more trouble than it's worth next time I go to rebed things.
I'll probably try the straight butyl route and see how it holds up next season. I also got a few sets of the new style chainplate covers, so hopefully that will also help in creating a better top gasket.
Josh McElwee
Sailing from East Greenwich, RI
2000 C36 MKII, M35B, "Chinook", Hull#1900
Clean the chain plate well with methyl hydrate or other residue free cleaner to get rid of any oil or other contaminants on the chain plates. It will help with a better seal. I just packed the butyl tape in with a blunt putty knife for a tight fit. No leaks at all after 2 years.
Ross & Joanne
Wavelength
Saint John NB
RKYC
C36 #658 TR 1987
Josh, unless they've changed the design the new chainplate covers will only fit on the center chainplates.
Hi Bud,
FYI, I did order the new style covers for all of my chainplates, and checked them before I pulled the chainplates out for cleaning. They seem to fit over all of my chainplates no problem. I was worried about this from all the postings that mentioned the lack of fit for some of the lower shroud chainplates.
I'm wondering if boats from some years happened to have used different bar stock to make the center chainplates vs. the lower shrouds? All of my chainplates have the same dimension bar stock, so fitting these covers was no problem.
Josh McElwee
Sailing from East Greenwich, RI
2000 C36 MKII, M35B, "Chinook", Hull#1900
Yes, that is kind of odd. Our lowers are slightly bigger than the cap shrouds, enough so that the new covers don't fit. I even tried to enlarge one but that would have thinned it so much it would have been very weak. It would be valuable to know what boats do have the same size chainplates and what don't. I wonder if Catalina even knows?
Yeah, I doubt Catalina would even know. My guess it was a minor variation in manufacturing. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that Catalina had the lower chainplates manufactured by one subcontractor (since they have all the perpendicular plates and welds), while the cap shroud chainplates could have been manufactured by another (simple bar stock, with a few holes drilled in it). Maybe there was just a batch of those that varied.
Josh McElwee
Sailing from East Greenwich, RI
2000 C36 MKII, M35B, "Chinook", Hull#1900