|
Rod,
I am sorry if you interpret what I said as Canadian BCC bashing. It was not my intention at all so if it was taken that way...I apologize!
My intention was to explain hull numbering systems on BCC's. We had a problem with the builder in Canada not placing a HIN on their boats. I do not know the reason for this...it was before my watch. Lyle Hess explained it to me that the builder had to pay royalties to SLM and to Lyle. The recorded number of hulls do not correspond to the the actual number of hulls that exists, thus there were more boats built than royalties paid. You can call this Canadian BCC bashing but I call it unprofessional management. This has nothing to do with the boats quality. It is simply a matter of fact!
I feel it is wrong for an owner of a boat not to have some kind of proof of its origin. FACT: It will make the boat without an HIN more difficult to sell.
There is little about the Canadian built boats I do not like. The ones completed by the factory are excellent. Yes, personally, I do not like the balsa core but it has its advantages...take it how you like. I loved the bronze castings on the bulwarks. We even tried to get permission to use the patterns but were unable to do so. I have seen some owner finished Canadian boats that are better than any the SLM has produced...ever....
I try to stay off this site as much as possible just because of this sort of problem. It was my intention to explain the HIN...no intention was said or intended to bash the Canadian boats.
Sorry I offended you or any other who owns a Canadian BCC's
Roger Olson
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 11:25 AM
Subject: [bcc] Canadian Built BCC's; ATTN Roger Olson
Roger:
Perhaps I am a little sensitive but it seems every opportunity you have to bash the Canadian Built Boats, you do. I don't understand this. You were not associated with the Sam L. Morse Company doing the contract agreement between the two companies. True our BCC C, has a balsa cored deck and cabin instead of plywood coring but many professionals would argue, in the classic sense of the word argument, that balsa coring is superior to plywood coring. Many boat builders before 1980 and during the early part of the 80's did not mold a hull number into the hull. Our first boat, a 1980 Dolphin 22 did not have a hull number nor did our second boat, a 1976 Nor'star built Flicka. Our Canadian built BCC does not have a hull number. Our boat has bronze bulwark stanchions instead of wood bulwarks stanchion; unlike the early SLM BCC's which had wood stanchions placed through the deck in wooden boat fashion. These were a constant source of leaks in the early BCC's. Further, all fittings and hardware are bronze. I am quite sure there are other small differences between the Channel Cutter Yacht built boats and the Sam L. Morse built boats but we know, we have a well built boat. After 18 years of extensive cruising with different owners, the boat is still well founded and an outstanding example of a well built boat. Does it make any difference at this point in time. The license contract between SLM and CCY is long expired. Perhaps you have your own agenda to promote the Sam L. Morse Boats at the expense of the Channel Cutter Yacht built boats. That is your business. If you have an ax to grind, then contact someone who worked at Channel Cutter Yachts and grind it with them and not owners of the Canadian Built BCC's.
Rod Bruckdorfer
S/V IDUNA, a BCC C
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [bcc] Hull # 17 Fox Fire
...............
A Canadian built boat has its own HIN and it must have a "V" in the first three letters. Unfortunately, many of the Canadian built boats did not have any HIN. This was only one of many reasons the SLM Co. discontinued their agreement with the Canadian builder.
|