On ebay, has been doing the rounds for sometime:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Lovely-Classi ... 54070a0d8e
any comment, I know nothing about Fireflies.
Firefly, god buy or bad buy?
Firefly, god buy or bad buy?
The Peril
Agamemnon
Lovely little Cadet
OK 1954
Xena Warrior Princess
Finn 469
Laser 2
Wayfarer World
Agamemnon
Lovely little Cadet
OK 1954
Xena Warrior Princess
Finn 469
Laser 2
Wayfarer World
Re: Firefly, god buy or bad buy?
Funnily enough, I've been looking at this one - a Firefly has been on my list of possibilities as a small two hander that can be sailed singlehanded, and this one seems in a good original state. The price has recently come down a bit, which to my mind makes it a more realistic prospect. I like that it has the original wooden-tip Reynolds mast.
I was going to have a look at it in a week or two. Unfortunately, am currently buying a house and Mrs Hotspur has asked me not to consider buying a boat until it's all settled.
I was going to have a look at it in a week or two. Unfortunately, am currently buying a house and Mrs Hotspur has asked me not to consider buying a boat until it's all settled.
Visit my blog Naval Air History at navalairhistory.com
Re: Firefly, god buy or bad buy?
Looks OK, though prices in Fireflies for boats without a proctor/Selden mast and Hyde sails tend to be depressed, as these are the bits that you then need to put on to race on the Firefly circuit, and they cost a lot - more than the boats are worth by a factor of 2, probably.
As a cvrda boat, where old bits might be what you want, still having a rotating mast is a big plus.
I've not looked at prices recently, so it would be worth having a look on the firefly site and the boats for sale places to see what they are going for.
Also worth checking along the hog and at the stern for rot.
As a cvrda boat, where old bits might be what you want, still having a rotating mast is a big plus.
I've not looked at prices recently, so it would be worth having a look on the firefly site and the boats for sale places to see what they are going for.
Also worth checking along the hog and at the stern for rot.
Rupert
-
Michael Brigg
- Posts: 1663
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:11 pm
- Location: Gosport, UK
Re: Firefly, god buy or bad buy?
This has all the hallmarks of a "good" boat. It has been in single family ownership for a long time, and looks to have been kept in a good state of repair. If they have had her for 25 years, then she clearly has a proper home over winter. If she didn't then she would be in very poor repair by now. That they have done a proper repair (I presume) of the Reynolds mast shows a determination to spend money when it is needed.IT would be worth checking that the topmast replacement came from Collar's Oars and spars (Oxford)
I favour a varnish finish for the topmast. Many of them are finished in aluminium paint.
The transom does not look original. The bung holes are higher than I would expect, and the brass makers plate is missing from it. (It should be on the Inboard Port side) and I cant see it in the box of bits.
The stern decks have also been replaced at some point. There should be "handle Holes" (for knotted rope handles)at about the stern end of the Bouyancy tanks. These can be seen on the bow, though they need their Tufnol rings put back on, as do the leads for the shrouds.
The original Bow breakwaters have been removed (perhaps to modernise the look) but really should be replaced if you mean to use it on the sea or bigger water as they are surprisingly effective and in any sort of Chop the water will invite itself on board. They are also part of the signature look of the original Mark1 layout.
The Shroud plates have been removed and when putting them bach it is worthwhile taking the trouble to countersink bolts through the whole hull to prevent them pulling out in a blow. This will make the mast support more or less bullet proof. Essential if you only have a Reynolds to play with.
Talking of the mast, check the collar fits the mast at deck level, and be sure there are no edges in the mast gate. If so it must be lined (with an old tufnol batten strip) to prevent it jamming. If it is at all stiff, this is far worse under load, and will cause the gooseneck to shear off when you gybe, (or even let the sail flap).
Check the seal on the side tanks. They should be alright as they have never been sat on (because they have Mrk1 decks above them. If they are not waterproof this spells big trouble. The painted hull suggests there may be some cosmetic issues on the outside, perhaps because of damp tanks. They don't seem to have inspection hatches. Hopefully because they don't need them as they are water tight.
Look inside the plate case from underneath. If the inner surface has any movement relative to the keel, this spells trouble!
The sails are tired and will only be good for classic cruising where they will look very nice, but don't expect much speed out of them.
A well managed and tuned Reynolds mast is actually still surprisingly competitive. The main difficulty is that new sails are not cut for it.
Check the condition of the pintle. These can shear if used with unmatched rudder fittings. (The "spoon"rudder supplied is OK but hot shot racers will want a dagger rudder. Much easier downwind in a blow!)
Overall I think this looks like a well (almost) finished project with just bit of tidying up to do. It is a blank canvas and totally original (deck & transom repairs excepted, but these are valid)
As for the price... If the wood is good I would say yes, but any additional work to the hull though will drop its value to less than the sum of its parts.
I favour a varnish finish for the topmast. Many of them are finished in aluminium paint.
The transom does not look original. The bung holes are higher than I would expect, and the brass makers plate is missing from it. (It should be on the Inboard Port side) and I cant see it in the box of bits.
The stern decks have also been replaced at some point. There should be "handle Holes" (for knotted rope handles)at about the stern end of the Bouyancy tanks. These can be seen on the bow, though they need their Tufnol rings put back on, as do the leads for the shrouds.
The original Bow breakwaters have been removed (perhaps to modernise the look) but really should be replaced if you mean to use it on the sea or bigger water as they are surprisingly effective and in any sort of Chop the water will invite itself on board. They are also part of the signature look of the original Mark1 layout.
The Shroud plates have been removed and when putting them bach it is worthwhile taking the trouble to countersink bolts through the whole hull to prevent them pulling out in a blow. This will make the mast support more or less bullet proof. Essential if you only have a Reynolds to play with.
Talking of the mast, check the collar fits the mast at deck level, and be sure there are no edges in the mast gate. If so it must be lined (with an old tufnol batten strip) to prevent it jamming. If it is at all stiff, this is far worse under load, and will cause the gooseneck to shear off when you gybe, (or even let the sail flap).
Check the seal on the side tanks. They should be alright as they have never been sat on (because they have Mrk1 decks above them. If they are not waterproof this spells big trouble. The painted hull suggests there may be some cosmetic issues on the outside, perhaps because of damp tanks. They don't seem to have inspection hatches. Hopefully because they don't need them as they are water tight.
Look inside the plate case from underneath. If the inner surface has any movement relative to the keel, this spells trouble!
The sails are tired and will only be good for classic cruising where they will look very nice, but don't expect much speed out of them.
A well managed and tuned Reynolds mast is actually still surprisingly competitive. The main difficulty is that new sails are not cut for it.
Check the condition of the pintle. These can shear if used with unmatched rudder fittings. (The "spoon"rudder supplied is OK but hot shot racers will want a dagger rudder. Much easier downwind in a blow!)
Overall I think this looks like a well (almost) finished project with just bit of tidying up to do. It is a blank canvas and totally original (deck & transom repairs excepted, but these are valid)
As for the price... If the wood is good I would say yes, but any additional work to the hull though will drop its value to less than the sum of its parts.
Michael Brigg
-
Michael Brigg
- Posts: 1663
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:11 pm
- Location: Gosport, UK
Re: Firefly, god buy or bad buy?
This has all the hallmarks of a "good" boat. It has been in single family ownership for a long time, and looks to have been kept in a good state of repair. If they have had her for 25 years, then she clearly has a proper home over winter. If she didn't then she would be in very poor repair by now. That they have done a proper repair (I presume) of the Reynolds mast shows a determination to spend money when it is needed.IT would be worth checking that the topmast replacement came from Collar's Oars and spars (Oxford)
I favour a varnish finish for the topmast. Many of them are finished in aluminium paint.
The transom does not look original. The bung holes are higher than I would expect, and the brass makers plate is missing from it. (It should be on the Inboard Port side) and I cant see it in the box of bits.
The stern decks have also been replaced at some point. There should be "handle Holes" (for knotted rope handles)at about the stern end of the Bouyancy tanks. These can be seen on the bow, though they need their Tufnol rings put back on, as do the leads for the shrouds.
The original Bow breakwaters have been removed (perhaps to modernise the look) but really should be replaced if you mean to use it on the sea or bigger water as they are surprisingly effective and in any sort of Chop the water will invite itself on board. They are also part of the signature look of the original Mark1 layout.
The Shroud plates have been removed and when putting them bach it is worthwhile taking the trouble to countersink bolts through the whole hull to prevent them pulling out in a blow. This will make the mast support more or less bullet proof. Essential if you only have a Reynolds to play with.
Talking of the mast, check the collar fits the mast at deck level, and be sure there are no edges in the mast gate. If so it must be lined (with an old tufnol batten strip) to prevent it jamming. If it is at all stiff, this is far worse under load, and will cause the gooseneck to shear off when you gybe, (or even let the sail flap).
Check the seal on the side tanks. They should be alright as they have never been sat on (because they have Mrk1 decks above them. If they are not waterproof this spells big trouble. The painted hull suggests there may be some cosmetic issues on the outside, perhaps because of damp tanks. They don't seem to have inspection hatches. Hopefully because they don't need them as they are water tight.
Look inside the plate case from underneath. If the inner surface has any movement relative to the keel, this spells trouble!
The sails are tired and will only be good for classic cruising where they will look very nice, but don't expect much speed out of them.
A well managed and tuned Reynolds mast is actually still surprisingly competitive. The main difficulty is that new sails are not cut for it.
Check the condition of the pintle. These can shear if used with unmatched rudder fittings. (The "spoon"rudder supplied is OK but hot shot racers will want a dagger rudder. Much easier downwind in a blow!)
Overall I think this looks like a well (almost) finished project with just bit of tidying up to do. It is a blank canvas and totally original (deck & transom repairs excepted, but these are valid)
As for the price... If the wood is good I would say yes, but any additional work to the hull though will drop its value to less than the sum of its parts.
I favour a varnish finish for the topmast. Many of them are finished in aluminium paint.
The transom does not look original. The bung holes are higher than I would expect, and the brass makers plate is missing from it. (It should be on the Inboard Port side) and I cant see it in the box of bits.
The stern decks have also been replaced at some point. There should be "handle Holes" (for knotted rope handles)at about the stern end of the Bouyancy tanks. These can be seen on the bow, though they need their Tufnol rings put back on, as do the leads for the shrouds.
The original Bow breakwaters have been removed (perhaps to modernise the look) but really should be replaced if you mean to use it on the sea or bigger water as they are surprisingly effective and in any sort of Chop the water will invite itself on board. They are also part of the signature look of the original Mark1 layout.
The Shroud plates have been removed and when putting them bach it is worthwhile taking the trouble to countersink bolts through the whole hull to prevent them pulling out in a blow. This will make the mast support more or less bullet proof. Essential if you only have a Reynolds to play with.
Talking of the mast, check the collar fits the mast at deck level, and be sure there are no edges in the mast gate. If so it must be lined (with an old tufnol batten strip) to prevent it jamming. If it is at all stiff, this is far worse under load, and will cause the gooseneck to shear off when you gybe, (or even let the sail flap).
Check the seal on the side tanks. They should be alright as they have never been sat on (because they have Mrk1 decks above them. If they are not waterproof this spells big trouble. The painted hull suggests there may be some cosmetic issues on the outside, perhaps because of damp tanks. They don't seem to have inspection hatches. Hopefully because they don't need them as they are water tight.
Look inside the plate case from underneath. If the inner surface has any movement relative to the keel, this spells trouble!
The sails are tired and will only be good for classic cruising where they will look very nice, but don't expect much speed out of them.
A well managed and tuned Reynolds mast is actually still surprisingly competitive. The main difficulty is that new sails are not cut for it.
Check the condition of the pintle. These can shear if used with unmatched rudder fittings. (The "spoon"rudder supplied is OK but hot shot racers will want a dagger rudder. Much easier downwind in a blow!)
Overall I think this looks like a well (almost) finished project with just bit of tidying up to do. It is a blank canvas and totally original (deck & transom repairs excepted, but these are valid)
As for the price... If the wood is good I would say yes, but any additional work to the hull though will drop its value to less than the sum of its parts.
Michael Brigg