> I’m thinking of drilling a pilot hole, with a small counter-sink, pouring some CPES into the hole (to protect the now bare wood)

I have never felt the need to do that,  but I can see your thinking.   However the purpose of the CPES would possibly be compromised by then inserting the screw.   A better approach might be to screw down the fitting (dry),  and then take it off again;   now you can pour the CPES into the already tapped hole.

Some sort of sealant between fitting and deck is important,  but I do not have a view on the use of butyl tape for this.

I used to use silicone sealant,  dispensed out of a cartridge,  but some years ago there was a vigorous discussion on the old Openboat site in which the general consensus was that silicone sealant eventually sets hard,  and is inflexible,  and also that it is almost impossible to remove later;   and polysulphide sealants were considered a better choice.   On my bigger boat I have therefore moved on to use a polymer sealant/adhesive called CT1,  at about the same cost as silicone sealant,  with good results thus far.

However I am currently part-way through a refit on my erstwhile GP14 A Capella,   and when I last did the job (in,  I think,  2010,  immediately before she was exhibited at the Dinghy Show) I was still using silicone sealant.    When I came to take the fittings off this time I found that it was still flexible,  still adhering well (to both deck and fittings),  and still doing its job;   no sign whatsoever of water ingress.   So that is after about 12 years’ service.

Removing it was not the impossibility predicted by others in that discussion;   a seriously sharp wood chisel initially used perfectly flat to the deck to slice through the cured sealant as close to the deck as possible,  with a slicing action,  followed by using the same super-sharp chisel used vertically as a scraper,  and keeping it entirely within the area covered by the fitting.    What little sealant was left was then removed in the course of sanding (orbital power sander,  with 180 grit).   Given sufficient care in using the chisel (and having it really sharp,  so that it could do its job properly) scraping of the varnish was almost non-existent,  and undetectable once the deck had been sanded;   and in any case that area is to be covered by the fitting again when I put it back.

If you use a cartridge-dispensed sealant,  whether silicone or polysulphide or CT1 or whatever,  apply it generously to both the underside of the fitting and to the threads of the screws.    Then screw down the fitting,  and while the sealant is still in a liquid state remove the worst of the excess with dry kitchen roll.   Then remove the remaining excess with kitchen roll dampened with methylated spirit.   But removing the excess must be done before the sealant cures.

Hope this helps,

Oliver

Also,  just in case you hadn’t already picked this up,  place your anchor fairleads absolutely as close to the stemhead as is reasonably possible.

You want the anchor rode to “hold her by the nose”.

And they may well be a handed pair,  so ensure that you put each of them on the correct side,  so that the warp leads in a fair line through them!

Oliver

Mmm  …   …

110 mm.    Before you go firm on these,  place them on deck and see what you think.     Personally I think they are a little large for the size of boat;   the difficulty is that nowadays it is incredibly difficult to source this type of fitting in dinghy sizes.   My preferred length is 75 mm,  but given the near impossibility of now finding any at that size (I bought the last two from Reliance Marine back in 2006,   and even then I could obtain only conventional ones in the size I wanted  –  the type you have were unobtainable in that size) these may be an acceptable compromise.

That apart,  they are a variant of what used to be called Swedish fairleads,  and which I gather are known in USA as skene cleats.     They are indeed a “crossed fingers” type,  designed to prevent the rope pulling out.

You are absolutely correct in identifying which one goes on which side.    The base of the “hole” for the rope (which is inclined to the base of the fitting) should be as near fore-and-aft as possible,  so the one at the bottom in the photo is indeed the starboard one.    Then when you insert the rope you need to temporarily pull it sideways to get it to go in,  and it won’t come out accidentally.

Oliver

Hi Steve,

I’m fairly new to this Dinghy malarky but have built one Dinghy this past 2 years and I’m working on some deck lights/hatches from a Dunkirk little ship at the moment and I am doing the very job you’re asking about, Metal fittings on to hardwood. As Oliver says It’s always best to dry fix your fitting first (pre tapping). I always fix down with one screw first and then using a self-centring drill bit make the second pilot hole, this is done to make sure the screw is dead centre as S/Steel being a little brittle could shear it’s head if off centre, do not over tighten. While the fitting is in position mask up around using low tack masking tape, less to clean up later. If your varnish is still new say less than 1 month then do not leave the tape on longer than 48hrs. I’ve just found this out to my misfortune. Your plan to drill pilot holes with a small countersink is spot-on as will stop surface timber from lifting when screw is fully tightened.  Just prior to final fix I part fill each hole with Sika 291i using an Inter-dental gentle pick and then a bead of polysulphide sealent along masked up area, both have long open times.

My fairleads are 300mm from bow to fairlead centre.

All the Best    Windy

I also ruled against a foredeck cleat as (rightly or wrongly) it might foul the Genoa sheets and just tie to the mast. If you do fit one then make sure you bolt it right through the king plank.

That did at one stage concern me when I fitted out A Capella,   but I had rarely (if indeed ever) had a problem in any previous boats,  so I was cautiously reassured.

However for cosmetic reasons my choice of cleat was a rather nice Herreschoff-pattern low profile one (in stainless steel,  my choice of material for all fittings for that boat),  and I did think at one stage that I might fabricate a nicely rounded and smoothed wooden capping piece to fit over it and mask it when not in use.    But with never even a single instance of the sheets fouling the cleat the capping piece just got pushed further and further into the background,  and in the end it never got made.

I sailed that boat extensively for about 10 years before I passed her on to my godson,  and I have sailed her again on various occasions since then (including having her back on loan for the latter half of last year),  and never had a problem of sheets fouling in all that time.

Oliver

Good question!

Agreed absolutely that for loads in tension the limiting factor if using woodscrews is likely to be the strength of the wood fibres around the thread of the screw;   this limits the grip which the screw can have.   In these circumstances though-bolting (with appropriately sized bolts and nuts and washers) should undoubtedly be stronger.

However that is not the primary type of load here;   in this case the load is primarily in sheer,  not in tension  –  i.e. pulling across the screws rather than tending to pull them out,  i.e. horizontally rather than vertically.   And if the diameters of bolts and screws are equal there is no difference in strength for loads in sheer.

There are however two matters glossed over in that last paragraph.    First,  the diameter of bolts used will be determined by the size of the holes in the cleat.   However for wood screws there are two different diameters;   that of the shank (if present),  which will be limited by the holes in the cleat,  and that of the core (i.e. inside the thread),  which will necessarily be smaller.    On A Capella I deliberately chose screws which were threaded for their full length (and thus no shank diameter),  because with only a limited vertical depth of the structure I felt it important to have as much thread gripping as possible  –  albeit that that decision may have been an excess of caution.

Thus the effective diameter of the metal in the woodscrews is less than that of the bolts which might otherwise be used;   but conditions would have to be seriously extreme before the strength of the metal becomes an issue.

The other matter glossed over is the statement that the load is predominantly in sheer;   I draw attention to the word “predominantly”.   There will of course be a slight “tripping-up” moment when the cleat is under load,  tending to lift the after end of the cleat off the deck,  thus putting the screws under some degree of tension as well as the load in sheer.   But that will be very small,  and in my case even less than for some cleats because (for other reasons) I happened to choose a low-profile cleat.

Then there is the question of practicality and access for installing the cleat.    I could of course have brought in an assistant,  but I was essentially working on my own,  and was in my sixties at the time;   so I found it easier to use woodscrews,  rather than have to reach under the foredeck to manage a nut and washer while at the same time turning a screwdriver above deck.   And that is despite two generously sized access hatches.

The final factor in my decision was that this was brand new construction,   using new wood;   so I had no anxieties over (suitably long) wood screws holding.   To date (17 years later) there have been no issues,  and this is despite the cleat being regularly removed in most winters so that the spliced painter can be taken off and put through the laundry.

But I fully agree that through-bolting would be the gold standard,  if you can conveniently do it.

Oliver