1963? Hydrodyne custome deluxe 1700 restoration thread

So confirmed some more things about the layup schedule.

First, all three stringers in back are added after the core is glassed over. They all came out with the whole sheet of glass. This should have been obvious for a few reasons. First, the article I read showed a picture of them installing the core and it was flat on top all the way across. Second, the roving over lap for 12" along the center. Would be tough to wrap that 25 oz roving around the corners of a 2x piece of wood, and why would you then cover it with a couple layers of 1.5oz fiberglass matt? You can see the matt covering the stringers clearly. We cut a piece out of the core cover glass and it is thicker on the center portion than the outer portion. On the bottom you can also tell there is at least one layer of a cloth. Weave looks heavier than the 6 ounce cloth I have worked with, but much finer than the woven roving on the top side, so the articles 9 ounce claim sounds reasonable.

On the pictures posted, the one with the laminate cutout side view, the left side is the thinner side. It still has a piece of balsa stuck to the glass. The right side is the part toward the keel and the glass layup is thicker there.
The other picture is where the Roving overlap is shown between the center stringer and the outer stringer.

Hopefully having this information saved in a forum thread will make it available for future restorers doing google searches on this topic.

Thinking of that, good place to put some google catch phrases in this thread:
Hydrodyne Dyne Custom Deluxe 17 1700 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Mercury fins on boat hood scoop nacelle wood balsa oak core floating bench hydraulic shock seat

That should cover it. LOl!!!!

Brian

 

wentworth, I have read your thread as part of my research before I dove into this project. These things are old enough and rare enough that it is difficult to find a wide range of information sources on them. For that reason, I am trying to be a bit over analytical as this site seems to be the best source of information and I would like to add to that for anyone else. Just an engineering thing.

One reason I am going to the top of the toe kick is to keep the visual sight portion of the glass clean. I really like how they did the non skid and did not want to cut it where it would show. In addition to filling the front cavity with urethane flotation foam, I am planning on filling under the seat cavity with urethane foam also. Probably something in the 10 to 15 pound density. This will provide a lot of support for the seat base and floor in front of the seat. The seat base will be turned upside down, supported and reglassed also as it has lost strength over the years.

The only fear of this is the urethane foam holding water if it ever gets in there. To help combat this, I will probably separate the core into sections and put a break at the back of the seat base. Doing that I am not sure how water would ever get in there other than it being left in a field bow down and open. Won't happen while I own it, but I do understand the concept that "Water always wins." We can delay it, but given enough time, water always wins.

 

An update to add how the seat base was glassed in. Due to dirt and trying to take the whole project in, I missed this along the back of the seat base. It is put in with at least 3 layers of mat from what I can tell. The sides did not seem this will glassed in. Seemed more like 2 layers that were 3 to 5" wide to taper into the hull sides. Once the seat base is out I may learn more, but this is what I have found so far.

 

I left the outside stringers alone because they were very solid. They look to be tapered and would be a difficult reproduction. Also, they seemed to keep the support needed in the hull structure as I removed everything else. Folks warned me that if I removed them, I could face a hook or other deformation in the hull. Just wanted to let you know. Glad my postings helped you in your research. I hope to one day put all my pictures online with a detailed analysis. Looking forward to see what your turns out like! Maybe some day we will see each other at a show!!!

 

So this is what we found. Why do my boat projects always involve a shovel at some point? Might name this one "Mulch II" Oh-well. This I new from the complete separation from the core we had already seen. What I was surprised at is the variance of rot. The starboard side was wet, but did not want to come out. Port side was already loose and just lifted off. The other side had to be peeled using the shovel, did not want to release and took pieces of the wood with it.

I will have to get some measurements and post them, but the core is 3/4" thick. Most of the balsa is 1.5" wide. The white oak varies in width, but will see what I can measure.

Still need to get the motor yanked out of this thing so we can finish stripping it.

 

So, any ideas on where I look to find people who may want to purchase the engine and drive components off this thing? The coupling joint for the drive is one of the parts that can not be replaced and mine looks mint. It looks like this really wasn't used much, or was only used in deep water as there are no nicks on the drive or prop. I can't use a prop for one hour without a small stone chip or something on it! Oil in it was very clean and the motor even turned over without any sticking when a wrench was put on the crank. plugs were in only hand tight, so it seems like the motor was winterized or pickled for storage. Inside the valve cover looks better than my cars.

 

I have mentioned this to other restorers before. Some believed, some did not.

While the core is removed and during core replacement the bottom needs to be shimmed and supported as straight as possible. Any rocker or hook (with one exception) will mess with the performance. When manufacturers do this kind of work, they put the hull back in the mold.

jim

 

not sure if you saw the pictures above of the cradle and bunk system I put under it. There are 4 - 2x4's and 2 - 2x6's under the hull right now supporting it. I have read a few post on this site from you about supporting the hull, since the core is key to the bottom rigidity. I have definitely headed your advice on this one. Once you get more than 8' up on the hull though, the curve is too great to try to bunk it. Up there I have supported the keel to keep it straight. The curve of the hull up here should be enough to hold it in shape, especially with the back well supported and no weight on the front part.

I am glad you had mentioned this in previous post, it definitely reminded me to do that step before tearing into the hull.
Here is the picture of the bunks I used. You can also see the gelcoat damage on the bottom. definitely some freezing damage with water in the hull.

 

Yes, I saw that. I would run a string next to the 2 x 4 to see if it is straight. They can sag when laid flat like that. It might not be a problem, but you are going to put a ton of work into this.

I would also leave the deck on for the re-core, it will help.

One extra comment. The 18 I/O came with a small hook at the transom to help it on plane. It was about 1 inch long and about 1/8 deep at the aft end.

jim

 

So the front seat mount is out, wasn't the worse thing in the world actually! Once I cut across the front flat area, about 20 minutes with a dremel up front the two corners popped loose and I drug the whole thing out. Below is a picture after the dremel cutoff disc job for future reference for anyone. Wasn't too bad once you figured out how the secured the thing in the first place. Quite a bit for gaps to work with.
Drug it out and another mess to deal with! yeah.