Wood vs Composites for boat building

[lbhsbz]

Was scrolling through a few threads in the "From the Mold" section and noticed that alot of the builders are still using wood for stringers/coring/transoms. Whats the reasoning here? Why not go with the composites that will never ever rot? I know Nordic uses composites, but aside from them it seems like no others on the west coast really do.

I imagine cost could be a factor, but with the price of a new boat...what's a few more thousand when we're already dealing with hundred(s) of thousands in many cases?

 

[RiverDave]

It’s definitey cool that composites won’t rot.. Thst said I still see plenty of 40-50 year old Campbell’s out on the lake each weekend.

 

[lbhsbz]

It’s definitey cool that composites won’t rot.. Thst said I still see plenty of 40-50 year old Campbell’s out on the lake each weekend.

I'm probably just pissy from fucking with my transom replacement for the last month...but I'd still like to know.

 

[wsuwrhr]

It's a "couple more thousand" on top of a boat that is already expensive.....

Was scrolling through a few threads in the "From the Mold" section and noticed that alot of the builders are still using wood for stringers/coring/transoms. Whats the reasoning here? Why not go with the composites that will never ever rot? I know Nordic uses composites, but aside from them it seems like no others on the west coast really do.

I imagine cost could be a factor, but with the price of a new boat...what's a few more thousand when we're already dealing with hundred(s) of thousands in many cases?

 

[warlock250]

I think the density that wood can offer is good for many things. Weight is strength offshore and vibration absorbing ability. In big cruisers they will use wood to shape and they fiberglass and seal it in place so even if the wood was to ever see water and get some rot it's not structural and won't matter.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[lbhsbz]

It's a "couple more thousand" on top of a boat that is already expensive.....

If I was in the financial position to afford a $2-300K boat, I imagine the difference in cost between wood and composite would be the equivalent of the broke me skipping lunch for a couple days

 

[wsuwrhr]

Well then, no one likes a tire kicker.

How do you know what someone spending 2-300K on a boat, wants? ')

Brian

If I was in the financial position to afford a $2-300K boat, I imagine the difference in cost between wood and composite would be the equivalent of the broke me skipping lunch for a couple days

 

[Ziggy]

Wood may be less expensive but then factor in the additional expense of resin/glass.
The composite was one factor that drew me towards nordic.

 

[Dirtbag]

I would imagine it depends on a lot of things. Add a couple grand to the cost of the boat adds a couple grand to the consumer. Composites may be lighter but if your boat builder isnt building for speed does a heavier boat give a nicer ride? I would think so? Its easy to say custom boats are in the performance boat industry but i think performance doesnt mean what it used to. When i think of performance I think DCB, BullHeadBillys Nordic, the enforcer, Eliminator speedsters and daytonas. Do you really need the composites in a Deckboat? or a big V Cruiser? Im not so sure the benefits outweigh the costs in many cases to be honest or practical uses....Sure it sounds cool....

Lets compare two performance deckboats which are constructed different. A shockwave 28 deck and a howard 28 deck. The howard is much lighter. with same power setup which one is faster? I would say they are equal. Ive seen a 600 shockwave do as low as 82 and as high as 86 out of the box. Similar speeds on a Howard. If we are talking performance is there a difference? Now when it comes to the ride Its all over the place. Ive heard shockwave has a better ride ive heard Howard has a better ride its pretty subjective. Ask any owner and they will go with their brand. What constitutes a better ride? personal preference again. Now im a shockwave owner and I loveeeee my boat but I think on the water the Howard is a better looking boat.....so then you get into the costs....and as we all know that can be all over the place but typically the guys doing vaccuum composites and stuff like that charge more. Which they should there is more to the process. But is it making the boat any better? again debateable in my opinion

 

[Ziggy]

I would imagine it depends on a lot of things. Add a couple grand to the cost of the boat adds a couple grand to the consumer. Composites may be lighter but if your boat builder isnt building for speed does a heavier boat give a nicer ride? I would think so? Its easy to say custom boats are in the performance boat industry but i think performance doesnt mean what it used to. When i think of performance I think DCB, BullHeadBillys Nordic, the enforcer, Eliminator speedsters and daytonas. Do you really need the composites in a Deckboat? or a big V Cruiser? Im not so sure the benefits outweigh the costs in many cases to be honest or practical uses....Sure it sounds cool....

Lets compare two performance deckboats which are constructed different. A shockwave 28 deck and a howard 28 deck. The howard is much lighter. with same power setup which one is faster? I would say they are equal. Ive seen a 600 shockwave do as low as 82 and as high as 86 out of the box. Similar speeds on a Howard. If we are talking performance is there a difference? Now when it comes to the ride Its all over the place. Ive heard shockwave has a better ride ive heard Howard has a better ride its pretty subjective. Ask any owner and they will go with their brand. What constitutes a better ride? personal preference again. Now im a shockwave owner and I loveeeee my boat but I think on the water the Howard is a better looking boat.....so then you get into the costs....and as we all know that can be all over the place but typically the guys doing vaccuum composites and stuff like that charge more. Which they should there is more to the process. But is it making the boat any better? again debateable in my opinion

To me, performance pros/cons set aside, the big advantage is for recreational users who are getting in and out of the boat a lot getting interior and bilge wet regularly.

 

[Cole Trickle]

Nordic has stated the composite material they use doesn't save weight....

If I was spending 200K+ on a boat and financing it over 20 years like a lot of people are ( I know everyone pays cash) I would want a boat that was built to last. If you are 100% always able to store your boat indoors I'm not sure the composite is an advantage but sooner or later if abused and left outdoors wood is going to dry up and rot.

 

[RiverDave]

I would imagine it depends on a lot of things. Add a couple grand to the cost of the boat adds a couple grand to the consumer. Composites may be lighter but if your boat builder isnt building for speed does a heavier boat give a nicer ride? I would think so? Its easy to say custom boats are in the performance boat industry but i think performance doesnt mean what it used to. When i think of performance I think DCB, BullHeadBillys Nordic, the enforcer, Eliminator speedsters and daytonas. Do you really need the composites in a Deckboat? or a big V Cruiser? Im not so sure the benefits outweigh the costs in many cases to be honest or practical uses....Sure it sounds cool....

Lets compare two performance deckboats which are constructed different. A shockwave 28 deck and a howard 28 deck. The howard is much lighter. with same power setup which one is faster? I would say they are equal. Ive seen a 600 shockwave do as low as 82 and as high as 86 out of the box. Similar speeds on a Howard. If we are talking performance is there a difference? Now when it comes to the ride Its all over the place. Ive heard shockwave has a better ride ive heard Howard has a better ride its pretty subjective. Ask any owner and they will go with their brand. What constitutes a better ride? personal preference again. Now im a shockwave owner and I loveeeee my boat but I think on the water the Howard is a better looking boat.....so then you get into the costs....and as we all know that can be all over the place but typically the guys doing vaccuum composites and stuff like that charge more. Which they should there is more to the process. But is it making the boat any better? again debateable in my opinion

https://www.riverdavesplace.com/forums/articles/howard-288-merc-600-bravo-xr-boat-test.263/

(note speeds)

The composites I have seen are actually heavier than wood by the way.

 

[Wheeler]

The wing spars of my plane are 72 yrs. old and the wooden prop. was built in 1934. Wood done properly just works.

 

[Dirtbag]

Nordic has stated the composite material they use doesn't save weight....

If I was spending 200K+ on a boat and financing it over 20 years like a lot of people are ( I know everyone pays cash) I would want a boat that was built to last. If you are 100% always able to store your boat indoors I'm not sure the composite is an advantage but sooner or later if abused and left outdoors wood is going to dry up and rot.

but then again if you are storing a 200k plus boat outdoors.......

 

[Cole Trickle]

Both aw

I would imagine it depends on a lot of things. Add a couple grand to the cost of the boat adds a couple grand to the consumer. Composites may be lighter but if your boat builder isnt building for speed does a heavier boat give a nicer ride? I would think so? Its easy to say custom boats are in the performance boat industry but i think performance doesnt mean what it used to. When i think of performance I think DCB, BullHeadBillys Nordic, the enforcer, Eliminator speedsters and daytonas. Do you really need the composites in a Deckboat? or a big V Cruiser? Im not so sure the benefits outweigh the costs in many cases to be honest or practical uses....Sure it sounds cool....

Lets compare two performance deckboats which are constructed different. A shockwave 28 deck and a howard 28 deck. The howard is much lighter. with same power setup which one is faster? I would say they are equal. Ive seen a 600 shockwave do as low as 82 and as high as 86 out of the box. Similar speeds on a Howard. If we are talking performance is there a difference? Now when it comes to the ride Its all over the place. Ive heard shockwave has a better ride ive heard Howard has a better ride its pretty subjective. Ask any owner and they will go with their brand. What constitutes a better ride? personal preference again. Now im a shockwave owner and I loveeeee my boat but I think on the water the Howard is a better looking boat.....so then you get into the costs....and as we all know that can be all over the place but typically the guys doing vaccuum composites and stuff like that charge more. Which they should there is more to the process. But is it making the boat any better? again debateable in my opinion

Both awesome boats....

I don't think a Shockwave runs with a Howard deck if both boats are dialed and carrying the same load.....The Howard is going to be 3-4 mph faster. (once loaded all of that goes out the window)

 

[Cole Trickle]

but then again if you are storing a 200k plus boat outdoors.......

Happens every day with boats and RV's....For the first 3-4 years people are pumped and really excited about the item. after that the excitement fades and life changes while you are stuck making payments on an item you are upside down on. Go check out how many boats,toyhaulers and motorhomes are rotting at storage yards while the owners continue to make payments and pay storage fees.

 

[Dirtbag]

https://www.riverdavesplace.com/forums/articles/howard-288-merc-600-bravo-xr-boat-test.263/

(note speeds)

The composites I have seen are actually heavier than wood by the way.

we all know boats set up perfect in perfect conditions can do certain things. I think if you ask any of the howard guys and shockwave guys they will say they see the same speeds i was quoting....but even so lets say the Howard is 2mph faster? what does that mean? If we are talking about boats built for speed im with ya....but these are technically family boats....so when it comes to the construction whether composites or wood what makes one better than the other? Its easy to see the costs they arent debateable but what makes one better than the other? Do they feel different? Can you tell a difference? Or are u seeing a difference in the hull shape? as i said its all subjective.

 

[Dirtbag]

Both aw



Both awesome boats....

I don't think a Shockwave runs with a Howard deck if both boats are dialed and carrying the same load.....The Howard is going to be 3-4 mph faster. (once loaded all of that goes out the window)

I have heard the same thing. And I dont doubt it to be true to be honest. 3-4 mph I dont know if thats gonna hold true or not. Ive always heard Howard is a lighter boat. On boath websites Shockwave claims 4600 Howard claims 4800....i think my boat weighs 6k lol. I really need to get it weighed.....but if all else holds true Howard is a mile or 2 faster what makes one way building the boat better than the other. If there is speed claims I would say it has to do with the hull and weight not construction.....thats just my thoughts and I dont have near the amount of years in this as you guys do....but i ask a lot of questions and am trying to learn as much as possible from one of these builders.

 

[Dirtbag]

I really love these types of discussions. Its not about a manufacturer. Its about a process. I love when i hear this company builds boats better or stronger or they have a better process. Most of the processes are exactly the same. There is little to no difference. When it comes to the finishing process and design and aesthetics thats where the differences lie. It was like the lavey vs shockwave thread. People think that because laveys are tabbed that makes them a better build over a shoebox build. Why? dont just say it. Lets get into it. lets have real conversation and not just fanboi bullshit. There are pros and cons to everything but at the end of the day longevity and customer satisfaction are what matters.

 

[rivrrts429]

If I was in the financial position to afford a $2-300K boat, I imagine the difference in cost between wood and composite would be the equivalent of the broke me skipping lunch for a couple days

People with enough money to swing $2-300k on an asset like a boat didn’t position themselves with that kind of cash flow by spending wildly. They watch every cent like anyone else does.

It comes down to return on investment over your projected ownership. Very few of these boats will remain with the original owner for longer than 2-5 years. The cost difference doesn’t always equate over that time.

I wouldn’t shy away from wood if I knew I wasn’t going to keep it for the long term and instead put the cost difference elsewhere. The difference equates to a lot of fuel you could burn over a summer season.

 

[pwerwagn]

My 257 Carrera is all composite/foam, according to Dennis. I don’t know if it really gains me anything, but having had to replace a transom on an older boat of mine...I like the fact that this one shouldn’t ever be a problem. It also might add a bit of resale to a buyer that realizes the benefit?

 

[Ziggy]

Nordic has stated the composite material they use doesn't save weight....

If I was spending 200K+ on a boat and financing it over 20 years like a lot of people are ( I know everyone pays cash) I would want a boat that was built to last. If you are 100% always able to store your boat indoors I'm not sure the composite is an advantage but sooner or later if abused and left outdoors wood is going to dry up and rot.

https://www.riverdavesplace.com/forums/articles/howard-288-merc-600-bravo-xr-boat-test.263/

(note speeds)

The composites I have seen are actually heavier than wood by the way.

I have a roughly 12sf sheet of 3/4" composite and it's definitely heavier than wood to me.

 

[Cole Trickle]

I have a roughly 12sf sheet of 3/4" composite and it's definitely heavier than wood to me.

Nordic used the composite material when re building the rotten hatch on my 210 and I asked if it would save weight and John said no it's about the same weight....

 

[RiverDave]

I really love these types of discussions. Its not about a manufacturer. Its about a process. I love when i hear this company builds boats better or stronger or they have a better process. Most of the processes are exactly the same. There is little to no difference. When it comes to the finishing process and design and aesthetics thats where the differences lie.

Dirtbag, (sorry for being short I'm in a class today), that is absolutely wrong. You can have two companies build a boat with the same fiberglass, same composites etc.. and they will be two extremely different boats. I.E. Howard has like 18 little mini bulkheads throughout their hull etc.. It's as rigid of a boat as you will ever get in. Other guys might use the same materials and the boat will be flexing all over the place.

RD

 

[Racey]

If you are using good real marine plywood and following proper procedure it is a great material. I'm not totally familiar with all of the composite stuff, but in my mind if it's not a 100% dense material it will still water log if water can get to it (back to proper construction technique) or at least get in between layers and cause many of the same issues that rotten wood does, It may not "rot" per-say, but like a surfboard with a crack water can get in there, and once it does it will just keep getting worse. Water is ruthless stuff given enough time.

I've seen plenty of 40 year old boats that the wood is still as good as day one, built properly and not abused is everything.

 

[Dirtbag]

Dirtbag, (sorry for being short I'm in a class today), that is absolutely wrong. You can have two companies build a boat with the same fiberglass, same composites etc.. and they will be two extremely different boats. I.E. Howard has like 18 little mini bulkheads throughout their hull etc.. It's as rigid of a boat as you will ever get in. Other guys might use the same materials and the boat will be flexing all over the place.

RD

i think thats more design related than process? maybe im wrong. I know magics flex a lot thats why they all see to have cracks in the back corners....

 

[Blackmagic94]

The wing spars of my plane are 72 yrs. old and the wooden prop. was built in 1934. Wood done properly just works.

Pics of plane

 

[DrunkenSailor]

If you are using good real marine plywood and following proper procedure it is a great material. I'm not totally familiar with all of the composite stuff, but in my mind if it's not a 100% dense material it will still water log if water can get to it (back to proper construction technique) or at least get in between layers and cause many of the same issues that rotten wood does, It may not "rot" per-say, but like a surfboard with a crack water can get in there, and once it does it will just keep getting worse. Water is ruthless stuff given enough time.

I've seen plenty of 40 year old boats that the wood is still as good as day one, built properly and not abused is everything.

Great point.

Wood or foam doesn't matter. If water gets in there it will destroy it. Most composites weigh just as much or more than wood. It's not until you start getting into Kevlar or Carbon Fiber that you see weight gains. Not because it is all that much lighter but because it is stronger and you can lay it thinner than comparable wood/glass/foam construction.

Ride quality is subjective and always will be until you can do instrumented side by side comparisons in a controlled environment. That said it can be obvious to everyone on the boat if your in a 24* deadrise hull vs a 20* deadrise hull on a rough day.

If my choice is between a composite boat or something with wood I am taking this thing every time:

 

[River Lynchmob]

I have heard the same thing. And I dont doubt it to be true to be honest. 3-4 mph I dont know if thats gonna hold true or not. Ive always heard Howard is a lighter boat. On boath websites Shockwave claims 4600 Howard claims 4800....i think my boat weighs 6k lol. I really need to get it weighed.....but if all else holds true Howard is a mile or 2 faster what makes one way building the boat better than the other. If there is speed claims I would say it has to do with the hull and weight not construction.....thats just my thoughts and I dont have near the amount of years in this as you guys do....but i ask a lot of questions and am trying to learn as much as possible from one of these builders.

Weight definitely plays a roll is handling and speed but other things are degree of deadrise, how straight the bottom the hydrodynamics of said bottom. There are so many variables that play a roll in the ride a speed of the boat its crazy. I've seen placement of water pickups destroy the ride of a boat.

 

[River Lynchmob]

Dirtbag, (sorry for being short I'm in a class today), that is absolutely wrong. You can have two companies build a boat with the same fiberglass, same composites etc.. and they will be two extremely different boats. I.E. Howard has like 18 little mini bulkheads throughout their hull etc.. It's as rigid of a boat as you will ever get in. Other guys might use the same materials and the boat will be flexing all over the place.

RD

To this you can also have two manufactures build two boats in a row with the exact same options and they will be different as well.

 

[RaceTec]

I love the technical aspects of it... Here are some answers according to the manufacturer... I believe Nordic uses Coosa, though I would love to hear from someone in the know?
Why are Coosa panels better than plywood?
Coosa's panels are approximately 40-60% lighter than plywood, depending upon density ordered. Coosa panels do not absorb water to any significant degree; therefore, there is no significant weight gain when exposed to water. Coosa's panels are made of high-density foam and fiberglass and will not rot. Moreover, our panels are more mold and mildew resistant than plywood along with being resistant to insect infestations.
http://www.coosacomposites.com/technical-data/faqs

 

[Cole Trickle]

I love the technical aspects of it... Here are some answers according to the manufacturer... I believe Nordic uses Coosa, though I would love to hear from someone in the know?
Why are Coosa panels better than plywood?
Coosa's panels are approximately 40-60% lighter than plywood, depending upon density ordered. Coosa panels do not absorb water to any significant degree; therefore, there is no significant weight gain when exposed to water. Coosa's panels are made of high-density foam and fiberglass and will not rot. Moreover, our panels are more mold and mildew resistant than plywood along with being resistant to insect infestations.
http://www.coosacomposites.com/technical-data/faqs

I believe Nordic uses nyloboard

 

[steak&lobster]

To me, performance pros/cons set aside, the big advantage is for recreational users who are getting in and out of the boat a lot getting interior and bilge wet regularly.

ziggy lives. . .

 

[farmo83]

In my mind as long as there are still no expense spared type boat builders still using wood I don't think composites are a better mouse trap. For example if composite was that much better I'm sure Schiada, Howard, Hallett pre Nordic all would have been using them.

As far as longevity I'm with Dave the proof is in the craftsmanship AND how a boat is cared for.

 

[highvoltagehands]

I believe Nordic uses nyloboard

Unfortunately the Nylobone is more prone to be chewed on.

 

[Pesky Varmint]

A few years back had a friend with a 33 foot Donzi about 9 months old. Had a defect with water coming in through
the bottom of the hull. I told him if it were me, I'd take the boat out of the water until it's fixed. His reply was that the coring was
composite and it won't hurt it.

He ignored my question about do you know why they call water a universal solvent?

I'm not a fiberglass guy or a boat builder, but I did read a book by Hugo Duplessis about fiberglass boat building. He said that quality
of workmanship totally trumps material choices. A well built boat with wood is to be preferred over poor workmanship with composite.

Just passing on a little useless layperson knowledge.

 

[Pesky Varmint]

Nordic has stated the composite material they use doesn't save weight....

If I was spending 200K+ on a boat and financing it over 20 years like a lot of people are ( I know everyone pays cash) I would want a boat that was built to last. If you are 100% always able to store your boat indoors I'm not sure the composite is an advantage but sooner or later if abused and left outdoors wood is going to dry up and rot.

My 35 Flame was built in 2001. When Nordic used wood. Stored outdoors and covered in southern Arizona.

Pulled drives and transom plates about a year and a half ago to rework all hoses and bellows and transom wood looks fine.

Where can I find the dry, rotten wood?

 

[ToMorrow44]

Lavey had a good write up on this subject when building their new 29. Here’s the chart and what they wrote:

Customers have a choice of core materials with Lavey Craft. Out of a variety of available core materials, the most popular one is end grain balsa wood. If you look at the spec's, compared to man-made materials, it's hard to beat mother nature. Balsa is light-weight, yet has incredible tensile, compressive and shear strength, so much so that aerospace companies use balsa. Once the balsa is applied, a final layer of lamination goes over it to seal it all.

 

[RiverDave]

i think thats more design related than process? maybe im wrong. I know magics flex a lot thats why they all see to have cracks in the back corners....

It’s the build process. Your boat can be built a hundred different ways even though the molds never changed.

 

[RaceTec]

Lavey had a good write up on this subject when building their new 29. Here’s the chart and what they wrote:
Customers have a choice of core materials with Lavey Craft. Out of a variety of available core materials, the most popular one is end grain balsa wood. If you look at the spec's, compared to man-made materials, it's hard to beat mother nature. Balsa is light-weight, yet has incredible tensile, compressive and shear strength, so much so that aerospace companies use balsa. Once the balsa is applied, a final layer of lamination goes over it to seal it all.

I think this is apples and oranges, you are talking about sandwich core materials, the guys above were talking about stringers and bulkheads? I agree with the end grain balsa core, and I wonder what Nordic uses in it's place, do they use the same material as their stringers? Do they even do sandwich core materials, or just a crazy layup schedule? I am surprised they have not chimed in yet?