Chain Plate Replacement --- 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium

Start
Prev
1
Next
End

1Sailor
Topic Author
Offline
Junior Member

5 years 6 days ago #6979 by 1Sailor

Chain Plate Replacement --- 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium was created by 1Sailor

Hello:

First a brief introduction: I am currently in the market for an IP40. I have become aware of the IP chain plate issue and am very concerned about it. I have read many of the chain plate threads on this forum. Out of 14 IP40s for sale on YachtWorld only one claims to have replaced their chain plates. Only one of the boats was built after 1998. Half the boats are located in hot, salty Florida. So, if I were to purchase a boat, I venture to guess my first order of business would be to replace the chain plates.

I found this interesting and detailed thread on another site regarding the choices to be made when doing IP chain plate replacement:
www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f55/island-...ith%20chain%20plates

So, consequently I have two questions:
1) Does anyone have an opinion regarding whether to use 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium?? The author in the aforementioned post is a strong proponent of Titanium. Does anyone have an opinion that would contradict this?
2) Has anyone who has purchased an Island Packet been denied insurance coverage due to the chain plates not having been replaced?

I thank everyone for their input. I hope to soon be a happy owner of an IP.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

hayden
Offline
Moderator

5 years 5 days ago #6980 by hayden

Replied by hayden on topic Chain Plate Replacement --- 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium

Phillip:
Your first post? OK....quick answer from me.
#1. Titanium is far superior
#2. Replaced chainplates by Mack Yacht Services are great.

Insurance companies do not turn down because of chain plates, who told you that? A miss informed broker trying to scare you.

Buy the boat, these IP 40s are a screaming deal. OMG, they were always $250,000 now today you can buy a fully refit IP40 for $150,000 and people are crying and looking for more give backs. THESE IP40s AT THIS PRICE ARE A CRAZY DEAL.....heck, I paid $150,000 for an IP35.

So, stop the worry. Get er done. Buy the boat, go sailing. Life is short.

Hayden....IP owner since 1991....

Hayden Cochran
IP35-165 Island Spirit
IslandSpirit35.blogspot.com
Rock Hall, MD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

jduggan
Offline
New Member

5 years 3 days ago #6984 by jduggan

Replied by jduggan on topic Chain Plate Replacement --- 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium

I replaced our 304 SS chain plates (1991 IP38) in 2016 after 25 years of service. The shift to 316 of larger thickness improved corrosion resistance. Changes to how the plates are installed reduced the amount of crevice corrosion from being immersed in a wet pocket. Some other changes were made in manufacturing and commissioning.

The 316 SS plates should be good for at least another 25 years, and likely more. They won’t be the weakest link. Likely will outlive me.

If cost is no object then Titanium is less subject to corrosion and chain plates made of it should be stronger.

I decided the extra money was better spent elsewhere.

The following user(s) said Thank You: hayden, 1Sailor

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Salty
Offline
New Member

4 years 11 months ago - 4 years 11 months ago #7002 by Salty

Replied by Salty on topic Chain Plate Replacement --- 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium

Take into account the chainplate replacement cost when making an offer. The going rate for replacing the chainplates with titanium is approximately $14k (based on IP35).

Last edit: 4 years 11 months ago by Salty.

The following user(s) said Thank You: 1Sailor

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Vandergraaff
Offline
Senior Member

4 years 11 months ago #7016 by Vandergraaff

Replied by Vandergraaff on topic Chain Plate Replacement --- 316L Stainless vs 6/4 Titanium

I mentioned the chainplates to the insurance company (BoatUS) before buying my 1985 IP 27. They had no comment; much more interested in seeing that the battery terminals were covered. Hope this helps.
Art

The following user(s) said Thank You: 1Sailor

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Start
Prev
1
Next
End

Time to create page: 0.091 seconds

Disclaimer

Sincerely,

The International IPYOA administration team.