tophatyachts.com

I have been reading with interest this very informative web site and member posts.
I am currently looking at purchasing a Top Hat and have looked at both the Mark 1 and mark 2.
Please could anyone tell me whether the hull of the Mark 2 is as robust in construction as the Mark 1? There seems to be differing lines of thought about the change from Baker built to Formit built boats.

I have been for a sail on a Mark 2 and certainly liked the feel of the boat, the interior layout was quite different to the Mark 1; your thought/comments would be greatly appreciated.

Hope to join the team soon!
Tim

Hi Tim

Isabella II is a Formit built MkII that has had knockdowns in Bass Strait in the 80s when sailing between Melbourne and Tassie, and now resides in the more peaceful Pittwater. Its latest survey gave it the thumbs up structurally, and with its new rig this year, should be fine for many more. I did have the below water-line sanded back and epoxied about 6 years ago due to osmosis - I'm not sure about the difference between Baker and Formit builds in the regard - but any glass boat around 30+ years old would be prone to this sooner or later. Good luck with the searching,

Rob

Hi Tim

Egret II is a M1 built 1973 and still has orginal gelcoat and no osmosis. Most Mk1's were amateur fitted out with the loo under the front bunk as the orginal plans show.



Regards Bear

Evening All ,

The difference between the 2 hulls is that the Mk 1's were hand laid and
the Mk 2's & 3's were laid with a chopper gun.

Overall the Mk 3 is lighter than the Mk 2 which is lighter than the Mk 1,
hence the differences in the ballast between each mark.
I don't exactly know where the difference in weight occurred.

The hulls were built on the same mould, as far as I have been able to determine.

Phillip
SEAKA

Is it true that the hulls are joined down the centreline and not at the hull and deck?
Greg.

The hulls are joined on the centreline and at the hull/deck joint.
The centreline has an externally layed up layer and the hull/deck has a formed lap with an internal 'tag' running the full length.

Tales is a MkIII and not finished as well as some MkIIs I have seen but the hull joints are very well done.

The only exception being the very front where the bow fitting is attached. The hull/deck lap runs out at the elevated part of the deck and leaked, rotting the wooden block. The lay up would have been done with the operator on his back and some of the layup drooped down.
I have rebuilt that area and reinforced it so it cannot leak.
Have pics if any needs them.
Cheers,
Tom

Hi all you Mk2 etc etc,


Gotta love the Mk I 's always remember the orginal is always the best!!

Hi all ,

On a serious note, what I got told many years ago was that the Mk I's are hand layed and are thicker around the waterline and below and around the chainplates etc. The back of the keel where the prop comes out was narrowed on the MkII's to allow more water around the prop to help stop cavatation when inboards are installed.The transons seem to be different on Mk2. Moulds are joined down the centreline otherwise you wouldn't be able to release the boat from the mould.



Regards Bear

Hand laid glass was proven to be 30% stronger than the chopper gun with tests done by the US navy so the mark 1 is stronger there for a start, the wooden furniture in the mark one is fitted a lot more strongly than glassed in furniture which was designed to cut costs in material and time to fit, the glass sink is no where near as nice to use as a stainless sink and ends up with chips in it that allows water to ingress into it.
The bare glass roof allows you to find leaks very easily in the mark 1, it might'nt look as good but try and find a leak with a roof liner in it, it is a nightmare, the wooden furiture when in good condition is way more homely than glass and gives the boat a traditional feel and can also be altered if you want to do a refit, the cabin on a mark one looks way better and you have the forward hatch were it should be up high were it is harder for water to find its way in, the mark 2 hatch is just the ugliest thing you have ever seen it got better with the mark 3 all of the marks are strong enough to go to sea as proven by all the journeys that have been done in them but the mark 1 is the closest to what Illingworth designed the boat to be I would suggest that you ask Phillip if you can have a look at his pride and joy and see for yourself just how nice a good mark 1 is

Hi Tim,

Where are you located?

Let's see if we can organize you to visit an owner of each mark so you can get a better idea of what you want!

Phillip
SEAKA