No announcement yet.

Hi everyone

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Hi everyone

    Hello to all,

    I'm Larry, my wife is Valerie, and we're soon to be the proud owners of a 1988 2450 Ciera. We'll be picking up the boat on Saturday and can't wait. It's like Christmas week when I was a kid! That was the longest week ever waiting for Christmas Day!

    Anyway...just want to post an observation I've made while looking for a boat. Sooooo many people out there simply think Bayliners suck, but coild never really give me a valid reason why! Found that funny. What I always found funny as well is...there are so many older Bayliners still in use that I just cannot understand peoples disdain for them.

    Well, didn't mean to rant on for so long so I'll just say glad to be here.


    Like most things, people have opinions based on how much someone spends on it. This goes back foreve, when I was growing up in the PNW, if you had Chris, Owens or Trojan you were higher on the nose in the air order than if you had a Tollycraft or Failliner. It’s like the guy driving a Lincoln giving the superiority eye to a guy driving a Crown Victoria. Uh, the body and interior are fancier but made the same way and the running gear is the same. So what if the Lincoln driver spent more. All four of my Baylinerguru have performed better in rough water and been more economical in the fuel department than the comparables, so, what’s the value of their opinions?
    P/C Pete
    Edmonds Yacht Club (Commodore 1993)
    1988 3818 "GLAUBEN”
    Hino EH700 175 Onan MDKD Genset
    MMSI 367770440


      Welcome to the forum, I love my Bayliner.
      Slightly modified 2859 6.5 Diesel Bravo III X drive
      96 Dodge 5.9 5 speed Gear vender OD.


        Welcome to the forum.
        Loved my bayliner and used it 6 months a year, with 2 trips to Alaska from southern Vancouver Island, had been in heavy seas a few times.
        trusted my bayliner in all conditions.
        (Sold) All In
        2002 Bayliner 37
        330 Cummins


          Originally posted by Larry Gasiewski View Post
          Anyway...just want to post an observation I've made while looking for a boat. Sooooo many people out there simply think Bayliners suck, but coild never really give me a valid reason why! Found that funny. What I always found funny as well is...there are so many older Bayliners still in use that I just cannot understand peoples disdain for them.
          I think I explained this before. Lemme see if I can find it...

          Bayliner was one of the first boat builders to use chopped strand mat (CSM - right side of pic). Normally fiberglass comes in woven sheets (left side of pic), which you lay down on top of each other interleaved and saturated with resin.

          CSM is created by running long fiberglass strands through a chopper gun, which cuts it into pieces about 1-5 inches long, then shoots it and the resin out of a nozzle. Instead of the traditional "laying" of fiberglass cloth sheets, the worker simply aims the nozzle at where he wants to place the fiberglass. He moves the nozzle back and forth to build up the fiberglass. Then it's rolled flat and (usually) vacuum bagged to remove air pockets, and allowed to cure. CSM requires considerably less skill and labor, substantially lowering prices. But intuitively it would seem to be weaker than woven sheets (where the fiberglass strands are continuous, much longer, and physically interlocked), so Bayliner was derided by many other boat builders for building cheap, flimsy boats.

          We actually covered CSM vs woven sheets in my structural composites course. The strength difference turns out not to be very great in most applications, provided (1) the chopped fibers are long enough, and (2) you have the proper mixture of resin and fibers (i.e. no pockets with not enough resin or not enough fibers). Consequently there can be a slight weight penalty to using CSM, but there usually isn't a strength penalty. Woven sheets are only superior if you *know* the loads on the final structure are directional. e.g. If you're building a fiberglass beam and most of the loads will be longitudinal, then you're better off using woven sheets with one of the directions of the weave being in the longitudinal direction. The tradeoff is that your beam will be weaker than CSM in directions not parallel to a weaves (e.g. at 45 degrees for a 90 degree weave like in the above picture), but presumably that's not a concern (there are 90 degree, 45 degree, and 30/60 degree weaves commonly available)

          By the same token, CSM is superior in anisotropic applications like decks (where you need it to be the same strength in all directions). Using woven roving in these places means you're designing so the minimum directional strength is sufficient, meaning you're paying a weight penalty for extra fiberglass in directions which don't need extra strength, but have it simply because your material is woven and concentrates most of its strength in the directions of the weave.

          Anyhow, that was decades ago. I don't think Bayliner or anyone has built a boat hull completely out of CSM since the 1960s/1970s. The method everyone uses now is layers of woven sheets (with their orientation rotated each layer to provide similar strength in all directions), interleved with CSM (either sprayed or pre-fabricated as sheets) to help fill in the pockets of resin-only that you normally get from layering two weaves on top of each other. CSM is also usually used on both outer sides of a fiberglass panel, to help generate a flat surface. If your outermost layer is a woven sheet, the weave pattern usually prints through.

          The woven sheets are not always woven either. Sometimes they're just fibers placed in parallel in one layer, loosely stitched to another layer with the fibers in a different orientation. This allows the sheets to be flatter, eliminating the resin pockets you get from an actual weave. Though you lose some of the ability of fibers to transfer diagonal loads to each other since they're no longer physically interlocked. You're relying on the resin to transfer those loads rather than the interlocked fibers.

          tl;dr - Once upon a time the criticism of Bayliner had some merit. But nowadays Bayliners are built just like any other boat. They are built to a lower price point (cheaper components, fewer fasteners, etc). But if there were a long-term issue with the build quality or danger to the operator, it would've shown up in the insurance rates. And thus far it hasn't - Bayliner boats cost just as much (or as little) to insure as other boats. Maybe even less since their replacement cost is lower. The negative reputation for being one of the first companies to use CSM still lingers though, even though everyone else uses the same process nowadays.

          Video of the process. You can see them spraying the CSM into the mold first. Then laying woven roving on top of it. You can see a bagged mold in the background at 2:42. Pumping the air out of the bag allows air pressure to squeeze air pockets out of the fiberglass and resin before it cures.

          1994 2556, 350 MAG MPI Horizon, Bravo 2


            Hi Solandri,

            Wow, awesome post. I read it several times just to make sure I had taken it all in! Thanks for posting it. It was a truly infomative read.

            I actually had a shop owner ask me if I knew whay they were called Bayliners?! He stated it's because they "line the bay when they break down"!!

            I said if so many are breaking down and " lining the bay", why are so many still in service and new ones being sold? Of course, he had no answer.

            To me, it's like the Ford v Chevy truck wars!

            With Chevy lovers it's...FORD = Fix Or Repair Daily

            Ford lovers respond with First On Race Day

            With Ford lovers on Chevy/GMC = God's Mechanical Curse

            I guess for non fans of Bayliners it's simply a personal choice to rag on Bayliners.


              Welcome abroad. Newbie here too.


                If you check closely you will find that most of the people who think Bayliners suck are the ones who never owned one. Yes in a lot of ways Bayliners are a cheaper boat. They have aluminum bimini frame and plastic hardware instead of stainless steel and other things like this, but the real important stuff is the same as on expensive boats or on what people say are good boats. The motors, out drives are all the same. Who cares if some hardware is not as good, the important stuff is.
                1999 Bayliner Ciera 2655
                5.7 Bravo 3


                  Welcome, Larry. Bayliner, Catalina, Hunter all have been bashed. Those boats allowed a lot of folks without a lot of money to experience the same experiences their more elite brothers and sisters had spent a lot of money to experience. The class was set, although I've found boaters are boaters. Boats, well, you see the continuing debate on most every boating page. I've owned a Catalina, a Bayliner, and a Meridian. I'm grateful to those boats for allowing me to experience an amazing lifestyle. Cheers!
                  Tally and Vicki
                  "Wickus" Meridian 341
                  MMSI 338014939