Fer-A-Lite

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by darr

Mike,

I have to admit that I have an unfair advantage over you and the rest of the folks on this thread. I currently own both an FC and a FAL boat.

OH, i see. You're saying because you own a boat made from FC/FAL, the material properties have changed from that given anywhere else and hence not reliable? Thus we are unable to determine what the real strength is....hmmm....

[MikeJohns]

Originally Posted by darr

That is the whole part of this that is confusing, one says there is no data there to determine x. Someone else says based on the data it is weaker than Portland.

Most professionals I have dealt with over the years would not be making comments based on the material without analyzing the data and the good ones insist on running tests themselves.

Since you and the others state that there is no good data, how can you make a professional statement as to its strength or suitability.

Yet once again, without any first hand knowledge or hard data, judgements are being passed.

This may in fact be be lashing out by some professionals for the audacity of a common person to try to resurrect FC.

As a consultant in the technology arena, I do not make statements that I cannot back up to clients, or in the event of a dispute with a vendor or manufacturer that I cannot back up. I call it making sure my back yard is clean before I call zoning.

So in reality, the proper response from any professional on this site should be that without testing and analyzing the results a proper judgement as to its strength or suitability cannot be made.

Which is why I made a number of samples available at no charge to professionals who want to make a professional judgement on it. Some took me up on it, some did not. Hopefully they will share their experience at some point.

But I guess that is not as fun and entertaining as material assassination without the facts.

I did not come asking anyone for their blessing on the material, but once again, as the manufacturer I will take anyone to task who insists on damaging the reputation of the material without having first hand experience with it.

Simple things like

A professional says: I know of boats built like this that have problems.

The professional knows of one boat, but the way it is stated would lead the common person to assume that all boats built that way has problems because a professional said so.

That is a blatant mis-statement.

And this thread is full of them.


As I have stated before, give me proof and I will act accordingly in regards to the material.

This thread is full of promotional material from you. You have unfortunately proven yourself completely ignorant of the mechanics of materials. In fact you don't appear to even have an inkling of what you don't understand.

Maybe you'd be better asking questions and learning that blustering like a schoolboy caught in an embarrassing situation.





There's enough data to compare and condemn your claims, There's other data that will probably damn rather than promote the material further. It's certainly essential information required to design with the material.

Most people here would see the irony in that You are promoting the material as the bees knees, while insisting at the same time that it's not you who needs to provide the data. Instead we have to disprove your claims.


As for your bit of misinformation at the end of that post:
So far in this thread I posted the following material wrt your comment above, I'm very happy to repeat that in any court of law:

Originally Posted by MikeJohns

...........
I did a quick survey for a friend on a 50 foot Adams built using Ferralight there were some obviously large deep and extensive problems within the layup but only around the stern gear. I suspect that the vibration from the prop had separated the matrix from the stern tube was causing some extensive traveling mischief within. I managed to get some material properties and guidelines from the Australian distributor but the price was prohibitive and repair looked to be something of a nightmare removing the compromised material. ............

Originally Posted by MikeJohns

...
I looked at a boat made from this method for someone who already had a detailed survey report. The client was a friend of mine and the boat was for sale for close to a year. It was close to becoming landfill.
It had been built according to the broker by an engineer to the recommendations of the ferralight distributor. When I contacted them they knew of the vessel and it's problems.

On that boat someone had ground off most of the outer layer I think because the outer layer of polyster filler was blistering. That would fit with gelcoat blistering mentioned elsewhere.

But on finding fluid filled delamination patches in the stern portion of the boat mainly around the stern shaft and forward into the garboard they gave up and put it up for sale disillusioned with the boat.

I'd describe the problem as severe and I can suggest several mechanisms as to how you'd get accelerated failure.........

That's not what you are inferring.

In fact many of your posts are full of misinformation, distortion and downright ignorance. This isn't a religion you are selling it's an engineering composite. You are trying to sell it to professionals.

Get your facts in order, ask questions and learn. Maybe there is a good application for the product. So far I can't see that large boat building is it's best application.

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by MikeJohns

Maybe there is a good application for the product. So far I can't see that large boat building is it's best application.

Exactly.

Every product has an application, somewhere. It is clear that he is desperate to find a market to promote his product, but failing on every count, so far, with regards to large boats.

[darr]

Mike,

Here's a good example of what happens in that 25% and below range.

Note the obvious lack of reinforcement.

And I would have to estimate that the FAL hull we have is around the 40% mark. Have not opened up the FC hull to see.

I will have to go back and calculate the rated % based on the wireplank method. That is where we came up with the steel ratio. Granted harder to achieve with mesh, but doable.

[darr]

Originally Posted by Ad Hoc

Exactly.

Every product has an application, somewhere. It is clear that he is desperate to find a market to promote his product, but failing on every count, so far, with regards to large boats.

See,

Here is a prime example of a misconception.

I am not desperate for a market, and I have not been trying to promote the product. You really should go back and read all the thread in regards to this, I had this discussion with someone else already.

Whether I sell another bag of material to build a boat I could care less. I have a niche market for the repair of FAL and FC boats. Soon I will find my little boat yard in some small developing tropical country and quit chasing technology and fix those boats that no one else wants to work with.

Our target market is actually using it as a sheathing to extend the life of failing wood hulls, but we can save that for another thread.

What I am trying to do is not have people without first hand experience and considered professionals from making unproven statements.

Secondly, not sure what you define as large boats, since the biggest FAL boat I am aware of is 70'.

What you all fail to see is the fact that regardless of your comments on its unsuitability there are a number of examples that disprove your conjectures.

And to date only 1 that can be used as a bad example whether it be builder or material. And the repeated usage of it is actually kind of comical, because it shows the desperation to show a bad example.

The numbers still point to success and not failure in its usage.

Given time, I am sure I will run across the rest of them. With digging around in regards to the Gitana, I found additional information on another C-Bird in FAL and I have current contact info., I had forgotten the correspondance with the owners granddaughter, so the list has just increased again.

Originally Posted by darr

That is the whole part of this that is confusing, one says there is no data there to determine x. Someone else says based on the data it is weaker than Portland.

Most professionals I have dealt with over the years would not be making comments based on the material without analyzing the data and the good ones insist on running tests themselves.

The good ones know about the value of the final product (boat) and avoid that (FC and FAL) material like pest and cancer!

Since you and the others state that there is no good data, how can you make a professional statement as to its strength or suitability.

Yet once again, without any first hand knowledge or hard data, judgements are being passed.

Hmm, except your judgement of course?

This may in fact be be lashing out by some professionals for the audacity of a common person to try to resurrect FC.

As a consultant in the technology arena, I do not make statements that I cannot back up to clients, or in the event of a dispute with a vendor or manufacturer that I cannot back up. I call it making sure my back yard is clean before I call zoning.

Well, in that discipline you failed by so far.

So in reality, the proper response from any professional on this site should be that without testing and analyzing the results a proper judgement as to its strength or suitability cannot be made.

But the maul experiment could still?

Which is why I made a number of samples available at no charge to professionals who want to make a professional judgement on it. Some took me up on it, some did not. Hopefully they will share their experience at some point.

But I guess that is not as fun and entertaining as material assassination without the facts.

I did not come asking anyone for their blessing on the material, but once again, as the manufacturer I will take anyone to task who insists on damaging the reputation of the material without having first hand experience with it.

Simple things like

A professional says: I know of boats built like this that have problems.

The professional knows of one boat, but the way it is stated would lead the common person to assume that all boats built that way has problems because a professional said so.
That is a blatant mis-statement.

So is yours about having no issues!

And this thread is full of them. True! mainly yours.

As I have stated before, give me proof and I will act accordingly in regards to the material.

First proof:
you are using polyester. That is a material insufficient to provide a watertight "shell" as you call it.

Next, last and final proof that it is not worth talking a single word about this stuff or FC you find here:

Fer-A-Lite

the value of the finished hull / boat, will be close to zero.

Who needs to discuss material properties?

Originally Posted by darr

See,
Here is a prime example of a misconception.

I am not desperate for a market, and I have not been trying to promote the product. You really should go back and read all the thread in regards to this, I had this discussion with someone else already.

Ohh darr, you obviously have forgotten where your promotion campaign started? here:
The perfect Passagemaker? II (building material)

Whether I sell another bag of material to build a boat I could care less. I have a niche market for the repair of FAL and FC boats. Soon I will find my little boat yard in some small developing tropical country and quit chasing technology and fix those boats that no one else wants to work with.

Our target market is actually using it as a sheathing to extend the life of failing wood hulls, but we can save that for another thread.

Oh no please! Just only by your description I can tell you that it is hard to find a worse material to sheath a wooden hull! Do not start another superfluous thread.

What I am trying to do is not have people without first hand experience and considered professionals from making unproven statements.

Secondly, not sure what you define as large boats, since the biggest FAL boat I am aware of is 70'.

What you all fail to see is the fact that regardless of your comments on its unsuitability there are a number of examples that disprove your conjectures.

And to date only 1 that can be used as a bad example whether it be builder or material. And the repeated usage of it is actually kind of comical, because it shows the desperation to show a bad example.

The numbers still point to success and not failure in its usage.

Given time, I am sure I will run across the rest of them. With digging around in regards to the Gitana, I found additional information on another C-Bird in FAL and I have current contact info., I had forgotten the correspondance with the owners granddaughter, so the list has just increased again.

See my comments above. The rest of the drivel is not worth my notes. and do not forget:

Originally Posted by darr

SRP - Steel reinforced plastic.

Does not fit in any of your categories, but should be a considered choice.

Upside includes:

Less maintenance than a steel or aluminum hull, stronger than most other composites.

Will withstand repeated impacts, better than other materials.

Downside, much more labor intensive to build.

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by darr

See,

…. I have not been trying to promote the product. You really should go back and read all the thread in regards to this, …

Hmmm..ok, let’s look at that statement, you are not promoting this product. Which by definition means you are must be stating just facts about the product rather than personal inferences and recommendations:

Originally Posted by darr

I make the challenge…..

And I somewhat agree….

The reason our method works…

Our plastering material is a blend of …..

We do strongly recommend ….

We have taken repeated blows ….

We wound up using an air ….

To our knowledge the rest ….

We have experimented with developing …..

Funny loads of pronouns…doesn’t sound very factual to me. Sounds like a sales pitch!

Originally Posted by darr

The plastering material has a flex modulus similar to aluminium which transfers the impact from the maul or partially submerged container across the steel armature, which then distributes the energy throughout the hull.

The steel armature in and of itself is not that strong, the plastering material in and of itself is maybe not the strongest, but when the two systems are combined I will put it up against any other material used to produce a vessel.

Ah yes, there it is. In case I couldn’t follow the personal evidence of its suitability and to dismiss any claims against your personal recommendations.

[darr]

Careful,

Daniel will get upset if we bring out the maul story again.

[darr]

Yes, this started because I offered it in an open forum that was asking about hull materials.

Don't think that really consititutes promoting it.

But I guess it must have been, since this thread started, I have sold and shipped several orders equating to over 1.5 units.

I have pending orders for two more units, I have to order in more raw material.

[PAR]

I've intentionally let this thread take it's natural course. I did so because of my calling this poster a self promoting thread starter, in previous posts. Far be it for me to suggest he buy advertising, but it now does clearly seem that not only has he failed to provide a reasonable assessment of his product's physically attributes, but that others are also finding this more an outlet for self promotion.

My understanding of this is Palmer has purchased the rights to this product and is now marketing it. He's done similar in previous business adventures and I've previously insinuated he stick with his day job, but apparently a regular avenue of advertising pursuit, by his own admission, isn't cost effective at this point of the venture so he posts here.

"Honest I'm not trying to plug 'Ferret-Light', though I do think is a good product". "I can't explain with reasonable accuracy why I think 'Ferret-Light' is a good product, but it is." "Has any one used 'Ferret-Light'?" "Has any one heard of 'Ferret-Light'?"

This is classically cheap form of self promotion and no one is getting fooled any more. Spend the money and have the product tested. Yea, it's expensive, but so are the lives of the soles that will be trusting it, in a gale off a rocky shore. It's part of the process, so is traditional advertising. Hell, the last time I saw your web site, is was years since it was upgraded, so maybe this is a place to start.

[SportyDog]

Mr. PAR you claim to be a Yacht Designer & Builder?? Just what have you designed or built? I have lived in Florida for 35 years I was a marine dealer for many years, since I delt in Power and Sail I should probably have read or have ar least seen one of your desigsn. Could you please enlighten me? Maybe our paths have crossed. Regards

[darr]

For my current stated business needs it is still not cost effective, I am not actively marketing the material to build boats. The economy is still in a recovery mode. Even when it is other than a line of small boats I have no desire to get in the building business.

Even when another professional from the boating industry that built his boat and owned it for 35 years gave first hand experience with it, the thread ignored his input, because as Richard stated you all have a preconceived opinion, in other words biased.

Once again, other than the original post regarding the hull material for the ultimate dream boat I have not promoted the product unless I was responding to a question or a misconception by one of the learned types on here.

And besides who on this forum would I be marketing to? None of you are in the market for ferro type boat, and since you are obviously biased in your opinion there is no networking value, in other words you are not going to refer it to a friend.

Or do you think the penetration I would have with the general boat building public would be that great from this site.

I think you all are too full of yourselves.

But I will see what it costs to advertise on here tomorrow.

[darr]

Originally Posted by PAR

I've intentionally let this thread take it's natural course. I did so because of my calling this poster a self promoting thread starter, in previous posts. Far be it for me to suggest he buy advertising, but it now does clearly seem that not only has he failed to provide a reasonable assessment of his product's physically attributes, but that others are also finding this more an outlet for self promotion.

My understanding of this is Palmer has purchased the rights to this product and is now marketing it. He's done similar in previous business adventures and I've previously insinuated he stick with his day job, but apparently a regular avenue of advertising pursuit, by his own admission, isn't cost effective at this point of the venture so he posts here.

"Honest I'm not trying to plug 'Ferret-Light', though I do think is a good product". "I can't explain with reasonable accuracy why I think 'Ferret-Light' is a good product, but it is." "Has any one used 'Ferret-Light'?" "Has any one heard of 'Ferret-Light'?"

This is classically cheap form of self promotion and no one is getting fooled any more. Spend the money and have the product tested. Yea, it's expensive, but so are the lives of the soles that will be trusting it, in a gale off a rocky shore. It's part of the process, so is traditional advertising. Hell, the last time I saw your web site, is was years since it was upgraded, so maybe this is a place to start.

So buying a set of plans for that 14' you have is probably out of the question?

[MikeJohns]

Originally Posted by darr

.......
I will have to go back and calculate the rated % based on the wireplank method. That is where we came up with the steel ratio. Granted harder to achieve with mesh, but doable.

Originally Posted by darr

........ I would have to estimate that the FAL hull we have is around the 40% mark. Have not opened up the FC hull to see............

You are joking. You quite happily wrote that the steel is 50% by volume in a 1 inch thick panel.

You have never calculated anything. You are not going to get anywhere unless you lift your game. Your own claims that you are a fantastically trained technical wizz who can see the bigger picture is a very poor pretense.

I think you are very close to having represented yourself as a con artist here. Possibly through your own ignorance.


Again you claim it a proven product and yet by your own admission you cannot account for 70% of the Ferralight boats built 25 or so years ago. Then you say that only one has had a problem

As for sheathing wooden hulls, you have no surviving vessels that were so treated if I understand you correctly, no data on how effective it was. So that's not proven either is it ! All you have is enecdote so far and a promise that the folks who treated their boats that way 30 years or so back will say how they found it at some time, maybe.

And yes I think we all have liability insurance not that you'd manage to get anything after what you have written. Your protagonists are are protected by law if what they say is true. No matter how much it damages your market, or makes you look a fool.

So perhaps you should start again step out of your belief system and actually start to list the cons along with the maybe pros of this not so wonder material.

For example how did tugboat get the message so wrong from you about the material properties ? It's weaker than anything else he was considering, and that's on the known figures.