DS1 Design Changes

Topics primarily or specifically about the DS1. Many topics are of general interest, so please use forum sections on Rigging, Sails, etc. where appropriate.

Moderator: GreenLake

Postby ctenidae » Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:39 pm

DS hull #1200 was built in July 1962,

http://www.arlingtonyachtclub.org/Fleet ... rsusii.htm
ctenidae
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:25 am
Location: Norwalk, CT

Postby navahoIII » Mon Nov 09, 2009 2:42 pm

With this information about # 1200 (if true), I think more and more that ours, # 1001, is very likely a 1961.

It would be nice to know how many Daysailers the O'Day Company made each year...
navahoIII
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:43 am

Postby GreenLake » Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:31 pm

August 1963 saw the celebration of the 1500th DS built by O'Day. Different source give different years for the first production DS. I've seen 57 and 59. If you take August 58 as a notional startign point, simple math will tell you that O'Day built 300 boats per yer on average during those years.

Hull #1200, we hear, is from July 1962. +300 brings you to 1963 with perhaps +/- 10% uncertainty, depending which days of the month are involved.

I'm afraid this type of estimate is as close as you'll get unless someone comes with more data.
~ green ~ lake ~ ~
GreenLake
 
Posts: 5501
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:54 am

Postby seandwyer » Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:19 am

The thing I don't understand is the apparent lack of record keeping on the part of O'Day. Wouldn't it seem that O'Day would have been keeping track of things like "how many boats have we made" and with each successive owner of the molds / rights to make the boat, this information would have been necessarily passed on, retained and known with a fair degree of certainty? Wouldn't it make sense that right now CCSB would have this information and still be assigning new numbers successive to those made before it? Why did O'Day treat the keeping of records and sail number assignments in such a cavalier manner - especially considering the one design nature of the boat. They must have known something like a number is important to the owners. Lapses in records like this is something that happens when there is a fire or some sort of catastrophic event in the company, but not just typical transition of ownership. What is the history of the transferal from one company to the next - was it tumultuous every time? It just seems very odd.
Sean
DS1 - 3203
seandwyer
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby navahoIII » Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:15 am

Excellent point! I know a couple of people at CCSB. I'll ask them about the numbers.
navahoIII
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:43 am

Postby navahoIII » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:37 pm

Andrea Van Inwegen, from CCSB, graciously responded to my query regarding accurate dating of our Daysailers with this:


Thanks for your e-mail. The DaySailer Association owns the molds and the rights for the DaySailer and has contracted with us as the current builder.
We do keep records for DaySailers that we build and are always available to help Cape Cod built DaySailer owners to identify the age of their boats etc.
Additionally at the end of our fiscal year we send the Association the
details of what DaySailers were sold and who they sold to. When we started building the DaySailer in 1995 we did not receive any prior production records from O'Day or any of the other builders.

It's my understanding that in the late 1970's O'Day contacted the
association to tell them that they were no longer going to produce the DaySailer I and offered for the class to purchase the molds, which they did.
I don't believe that any production records were passed onto the Association when they purchased the molds. When O'Day was still in business DaySailer owners could easily contact O'Day and get any of those details. Since then, O'Day went out of business and I believe those records have been lost. Rudy at D&R Marine might have a better handle as to what happened to any of those records. There is a good spreadsheet here that the association has put together for identifying the age of DaySailers based on sail numbers - http://forum.daysailer.org/tech_hullindex.php. Otherwise, I would think the
association secretary would be able to offer any further assistance with
regard to this.

Please let us know if you have any further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,
Andrea L. Van Inwegen

Cape Cod Shipbuilding Co.
7 Narrows Road P.O. Box 152
Wareham, MA 02571-0152
Phone: (508) 295 - 3550 Fax: (508) 295 - 3551 www.capecodshipbuilding.com
navahoIII
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:43 am

Postby ctenidae » Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:28 am

I wonder what happened to the old molds as design changes were made- did they simply modify the old molds or make new ones? I'm thinking adding in the motor well or changing a mountin gpoint wouldn't be all that tough, but have tehre been design changes that would neccesitate building a new mold? If so, I wonder what happened to the old ones...
ctenidae
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:25 am
Location: Norwalk, CT

name plates

Postby navahoIII » Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:39 am

It looks like some of the DSIs have name plates (on the transom coaming) with O'Day...Fall River, MA and others have O'Day...Boston, MA. Ours (a 1961) has Boston. Is Fall River later?

Should we add a column?
navahoIII
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:43 am

Re: name plates

Postby ctenidae » Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:51 am

navahoIII wrote:It looks like some of the DSIs have name plates (on the transom coaming) with O'Day...Fall River, MA and others have O'Day...Boston, MA. Ours (a 1961) has Boston. Is Fall River later?

Should we add a column?


Done.
ctenidae
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:25 am
Location: Norwalk, CT

Postby jpclowes » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:24 pm

ctenidae wrote:The open keelson is annoying, as it collects a good couple inches of water. And leaves, sand, slime, and everything else under the sun.

I'm going to go out on a limb and postulate that from 1965 on, it's closed and connected to the bow tank. Just a guess, but I bet it was part of the 1965 design changes.


My '65 has the open keelson too. So it may have been later than that.

Another characteristic you might look at is the foredeck. On earlier DS' the foredeck was molded to look like wood planking. Some time later it was changed to non-skid.

My friend Scott has DS 1128, and his is similar to the other 1962 DS' with the bumps on the transom for the traveler, and the little brass brakcets for the outboard motor mount. (He doesn't do computers, so it is second hand info, sorry.)

Things like hull stringers and positioning of jib blocks are things that can be changed very easily by previous owners, so don't rely on them too much in determining dates. (I think mine were added or changed.)

Edit: the fordeck change happened around 1960 or 1961 I think.
J .P. Clowes
Eastern Great Lakes Regional V.P.
DSI 14083
jpclowes
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 9:10 am
Location: Columbus, Ohio

Postby navahoIII » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:41 pm

Ours (1961) has a non-skid foredeck.
navahoIII
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 9:43 am

Postby GreenLake » Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:02 pm

The interesting thing for this thread is the original configuration. To make the information useful, anything about the original configuarion that is known or can be reliably determined from some evidence, should be reported here, and added to the spreadsheet.

With things like hull or sail numbers / build years it would be nice if people could state whether the information is from a hull plate or other physical evidence. Where it cannot be determined for sure, it would be good to either not provide the information or to indicate it as unconfirmed, perhaps by use of (?).

So on my boat, a suspected 1963 with sail # 1404 (from state registration papers), there's evidence that a hull plate was mounted on the rear coaming (none present today) etc. etc.

Non-skid decking: yes.

About the changes in the mould. The deck mould seems to have been changed, but the hull mould(s) were apparently kept the same for the DS1, in order to preserve the ability to race it as a one-design.
~ green ~ lake ~ ~
GreenLake
 
Posts: 5501
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:54 am

Postby ctenidae » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:10 pm

GreenLake wrote:The interesting thing for this thread is the original configuration. To make the information useful, anything about the original configuarion that is known or can be reliably determined from some evidence, should be reported here, and added to the spreadsheet.



Absolutely. Things like jib sheet rigging get changed a lot by owners, so only if you have good evidence of the original configuration should you put it in. some things are easy to tell, like motor wells and screwjacks, but others could have been changed and look original if done well.
ctenidae
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 8:25 am
Location: Norwalk, CT

Postby GreenLake » Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:59 pm

The spreadsheet allows comments. Those are useful to provide information about the source of some data. If there's apparently solid information (like state registration records) that is nevertheless suspect because it flatly disagrees with the construction of the boat, I suggest to put the best information in the data cell, but provide a comment on how that information was arrived at. I've done a bit of that in my entry.
~ green ~ lake ~ ~
GreenLake
 
Posts: 5501
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:54 am

Postby We're Here » Sat Nov 14, 2009 9:37 pm

A point of interest: my DS1 #3338 has a brass plate on the aft face of the cuddy that reads: Commemorative Model, 1958-1968. It has a black hull and teak floorboards. This would appear to place the first year of production at 1958.
We're Here
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 9:23 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Day Sailer I Only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: igotit and 3 guests