Construction
- click the image to enlarge it -
|
The basic story...
Like every other builder there's little question that Columbia Yachts was in business to make money and sell boats. And perhaps more so then than today, one way to prove a boat's qualities to a prospective buyer was to do it on the racecourse.
When the Columbia 50 was built the only other boats in its size range to race against were made of wood. It doesn't take much imagination to envision what a new Columbia 50 must have looked like at the yacht club dock--all that gleaming gelcoat--in comparison to its painted and varnished competitors. To get an idea, take a look at the brochure on this website.
But the staggering thing must have been the low cost of such a large boat in comparison to the wood boats, which were constructed far more laboriously, and required far more labor to maintain thereafter. Modern technology had suddenly opened up racing at a premium "big boat" level to people who were far less wealthy than ever before, no doubt opening up a whole new category of buyers for Columbia. No longer would the 50 foot slips in the marina be predominantly filled with wooden boats belonging to the wealthy elite. The future had arrived.
With the advent of the IOR not much later, however, not to mention its relatively conservative, all-around design, racing success was short lived for the Columbia 50. And in general, no Columbia enjoyed the racing success of, for example, the Cal 40 or Ericson 35. Those manufacturers also had a reputation on the West Coast for somewhat more careful construction methods, as opposed to the perhaps more mass-production / lower cost methods used at Columbia.
But regardless of the construction details, Columbias never had a reputation for hull or deck failures, so they must have been doing something right. And certainly in the early days of fiberglass, before the properties of the material were so well known, they overbuilt rather than underbuilt by a wide margin. Structural integrity has not been a problem.
Another benefit of the Columbia 50 took a while to discover. At one point down the road it seemed that boats everywhere were getting "the pox" (osmotic blisters), and with little understanding of the underlying problems or the best methods of repair, owners of fiberglass boats everywhere had reason for concern. As it turned out, the resin that was used when the Columbia 50 was built had different properties than the resin used a decade or more later during the energy crisis which, maybe combined with the other construction details, resulted in no problems with blisters for Columbia 50s as far as we know.
Heavy construction and no blisters aside, in the endless debates over how well boats are built, Columbias were the Chevys and not the Cadillacs. The hull probably flexes a little more than a Hinckley Sou'west 50 in the open ocean, and the fiberglass liner that forms the interior probably makes a little more noise under the same conditions as well. But then again the Hinckley sold for at least three times as much.
Some owners of early Columbia 50s were very glad to have "stick built" boats, with interiors that were constructed directly into the hull, rather than having the fiberglass "liner" used in the latter half of the production run form the basic structure of the interior. But as pointed out in the verbiage accompanying the Owens Corning advertisement above, beyond cutting the cost of construction significantly, the liner also enabled a significant weight savings--weight that could be put back into the keel where it could be used to improve performance. In the end, liner or not doesn't seem to make much difference.
Careful study of the images above, taken from the Owens-Corning ad, gives good insight into how the boats were put together. Essentially it involved four large fiberglass pieces, the hull, into which was glassed an interior "liner," and the deck, on to which the inside "cabin top" was glassed, before mating it to the hull. The internal ballast consisted of two cast lead inserts that were set in place and then fiberglassed in.
Beyond internal ballast (no keel bolts to worry about), another nice benefit of the design is a substantial, raised fiberglass (and teak-capped) toerail where the deck meets the hull, minimizing leakage that is so common in other boats at the hull-deck joint.
Columbia Yachts reportedly produced 56 factory boats from 1965-1972 and then one more in 1974. (The history of fiberglass boatbuilding in Costa Mesa during this time period is fascinating. For a great summary, click here.)
When the Columbia 50 was built the only other boats in its size range to race against were made of wood. It doesn't take much imagination to envision what a new Columbia 50 must have looked like at the yacht club dock--all that gleaming gelcoat--in comparison to its painted and varnished competitors. To get an idea, take a look at the brochure on this website.
But the staggering thing must have been the low cost of such a large boat in comparison to the wood boats, which were constructed far more laboriously, and required far more labor to maintain thereafter. Modern technology had suddenly opened up racing at a premium "big boat" level to people who were far less wealthy than ever before, no doubt opening up a whole new category of buyers for Columbia. No longer would the 50 foot slips in the marina be predominantly filled with wooden boats belonging to the wealthy elite. The future had arrived.
With the advent of the IOR not much later, however, not to mention its relatively conservative, all-around design, racing success was short lived for the Columbia 50. And in general, no Columbia enjoyed the racing success of, for example, the Cal 40 or Ericson 35. Those manufacturers also had a reputation on the West Coast for somewhat more careful construction methods, as opposed to the perhaps more mass-production / lower cost methods used at Columbia.
But regardless of the construction details, Columbias never had a reputation for hull or deck failures, so they must have been doing something right. And certainly in the early days of fiberglass, before the properties of the material were so well known, they overbuilt rather than underbuilt by a wide margin. Structural integrity has not been a problem.
Another benefit of the Columbia 50 took a while to discover. At one point down the road it seemed that boats everywhere were getting "the pox" (osmotic blisters), and with little understanding of the underlying problems or the best methods of repair, owners of fiberglass boats everywhere had reason for concern. As it turned out, the resin that was used when the Columbia 50 was built had different properties than the resin used a decade or more later during the energy crisis which, maybe combined with the other construction details, resulted in no problems with blisters for Columbia 50s as far as we know.
Heavy construction and no blisters aside, in the endless debates over how well boats are built, Columbias were the Chevys and not the Cadillacs. The hull probably flexes a little more than a Hinckley Sou'west 50 in the open ocean, and the fiberglass liner that forms the interior probably makes a little more noise under the same conditions as well. But then again the Hinckley sold for at least three times as much.
Some owners of early Columbia 50s were very glad to have "stick built" boats, with interiors that were constructed directly into the hull, rather than having the fiberglass "liner" used in the latter half of the production run form the basic structure of the interior. But as pointed out in the verbiage accompanying the Owens Corning advertisement above, beyond cutting the cost of construction significantly, the liner also enabled a significant weight savings--weight that could be put back into the keel where it could be used to improve performance. In the end, liner or not doesn't seem to make much difference.
Careful study of the images above, taken from the Owens-Corning ad, gives good insight into how the boats were put together. Essentially it involved four large fiberglass pieces, the hull, into which was glassed an interior "liner," and the deck, on to which the inside "cabin top" was glassed, before mating it to the hull. The internal ballast consisted of two cast lead inserts that were set in place and then fiberglassed in.
Beyond internal ballast (no keel bolts to worry about), another nice benefit of the design is a substantial, raised fiberglass (and teak-capped) toerail where the deck meets the hull, minimizing leakage that is so common in other boats at the hull-deck joint.
Columbia Yachts reportedly produced 56 factory boats from 1965-1972 and then one more in 1974. (The history of fiberglass boatbuilding in Costa Mesa during this time period is fascinating. For a great summary, click here.)
Over time...
In terms of how the boats have held up over time, here's a quote from Latitude 38:
THE DEFINITION OF A PROPER CRUISING YACHT
I saw the July 20 'Lectronic item about Justin Jenkins and his girlfriend getting ready to go cruising in a Columbia 34. Is a 40-year-old Columbia something that you'd consider a 'proper cruising boat'?
Mike Finkle
San Francisco
Mike — We're going to take the easy way out and define a 'proper cruising yacht' as one that has proven it can get the job done. To that end we're going to republish a '00 Changes from the then-Santa Clara-based Roy Wessbacher, who is a member of Latitude 38's Frugal Cruising Hall of Fame.
"Having now covered 31,700 ocean miles and visited 35 countries with my Columbia 34 MKII Breta, my boat and I are back in the United States. I finished the trip as I began it, singlehanded. But while enroute I had a total of 17 crewmembers, all of them vegetarians — and all of them female. Cynthia, a Dutch girl, even lasted through the whole ugly Red Sea leg from Sri Lanka up to Israel — and that 4,400 miles took 147 days. Susanne, a Swedish girl, did the Atlantic and the Caribbean with me, which was 3,400 miles and 109 days. Maus, my cat, accompanied me all the way around. I kept an exact record of all my expenses during my circumnavigation. In the 4 years, 9 months and 9 days it took me to sail from Puerto Vallarta to Puerto Vallarta, I spent an average of $14.66 a day. That's $445 a month, $5,350 a year, or a grand total of $25,300. I had budgeted $20 day, so I completed the trip way under budget. Those numbers include every single expenditure. I did two bottom jobs, one in New Zealand and one in Thailand. I had no major breakdowns, and didn't fly home."
As we recall, Wessbacher paid $10,000 for his Columbia 34. After his circumnavigation he purchased a LaFitte 44.
We're also reminded that Jaspar and Flocerfida Benincasa not only did the '03 Ha-Ha with their Las Vegas-based Columbia 34 MKII Flocerfida, but that the novice sailors had a fabulous time cruising their modest boat most of the way across the Pacific. They subsequently purchased a 44-footer and were getting ready to go cruising again. So who knows, maybe young folks save so much money by cruising inexpensive boats that they can buy bigger ones?
By the way, some older sailors — such as Roger Fitzwilson of the San Diego-based Columbia 50 Windstorm, previously owned by Columbia Yachts owner Dick Valdez — claim that Southern California boats built prior to '73 are stronger than those built in the years immediately following. The reason is the Oil Crisis of '73, which was created when the members of OPEC proclaimed an oil embargo on the West following the decision of the United States to re-arm Israel after the Yom Kippur War. The price of a barrel of oil quadrupled to nearly $12/barrel — it's about $90/barrel now — and marked the end of U.S. drivers' paying 25 cents for a gallon of gas. Since the main component of fiberglass boats is petroleum products, the cost of the raw materials for fiberglass boats shot up. So hulls of boats, which previously had been ridiculously thick to err on the side of caution, became thinner.
A modern drawing...
A modern drawing of the customized interior of the Columbia 50 "Avenger" showing a private owner's double to starboard and single settee to port. The stock layout featured two pilot berths and two settees in the main saloon. The second head on the port side was a popular option with many owners when the boats were new.
Columbia 50 Owners' Network
- Life Begins at 50! -
- Life Begins at 50! -