Would anyone care to identify this Wenonah?

[jish1969]

Heading out to look at it later this week because I love projects and really can't help myself but I cant figure out whichow model it is. Seller isn't much help either, just that its 16ft. Could it be an early 90's Sundowner? Worth the ride? It's only fair to say, this would possibly be replacing an OT Discovery...

 

[Alan Gage]

I don't know which model but if it's really 16' long then it's not either of the Sundowners. Every Wenonah I've seen has had the model engraved into the HID tag.

Alan

 

[dougd]

heck if it's replacing an OT Disco, I have one, then it should be a step up. Not sure of the model either. It should be lighter though. Maybe new gunwales? New seats or reworked seats all of which are fairly simple jobs. Hull looks in good shape. Depending on the price I'd probably go for it but heck, I'll try to fix up just about any boat!

 

[Guest]

Heading out to look at it later this week because I love projects and really can't help myself but I cant figure out whichow model it is. Seller isn't much help either, just that its 16ft. It's only fair to say, this would possibly be replacing an OT Discovery...

I would put no credence in it actually being 16 feet long. Half the used boats I have bought or looked at were mismeasured.

Or, more accurately, not measured at all, just eyeballed. 16 feet seems to be a favorite random number, but you never know; DougD’s Optima was Craigslisted at 19 feet

 

[Bothwell Voyageur]

Adirondack? Doesn't look like an Aurora. Interesting set up with two thwarts and no yolk, maybe they paddled it solo. Looks more like a 17ft Sundowner.

 

[jish1969]

The yoke just appears to be missing, there are definitely screws where it should be, gunwales might be the biggest issue but hopefully a 4ft section from Harmony takes care of that. I have my doubts about it being 16ft as well, because it looks like at least a 17 footer to me, but we shall see.

 

[jish1969]

Took a look at it on Saturday, it was a Sundowner 17. I could taken care of the woodwork myself but those two big patches made me nervous. One was soft and a crack was present on the inside of the hull as well, so I had to pass on it.

 

[jish1969]

No Title

So I its got me thinking now. This is the tuff-weave hull and the patch jobs are in the image below. I'm pretty sure I can get this for a song, and while the patches themselves are big only one of them has a small crack peeking through on the inside of the hull. I dont doubt my abilities to repatch this myself, but since I would be replacing a canoe in near perfect condition I would want to make these look as non-existent as possible. Is this reasonable to think with tuff weave?
Two sections of the gunwales need replacing as well, and I would scarph them in. The seats need recanting(I would just web them), and all of the woodwork needs to be sanded, stained and teak oiled.
I guess what I'm asking is how many of you would take this on for 200 bucks...

 

[Dr John]

No Title

I have to say, you're comparing two totally different boats there. If it were me, the final look would be less important than the intended usage, assuming you want to fix it up. You probably know this, but even if you're talking a Discovery 164, the Sundowner is going to a faster, more straight lined boat whereas the Discovery will be better in Class I, II rocky rivers (unless you're a downriver racer, but that's a whole different ball of wax).

The patches can definitely be made to blend into the outside of the hull. If well feathered and with a coat of paint on the top they will be difficult to notice. I usually find that patches are easier to see on the inside of the hull. I don't know if it's just because we usually don't take the time to fare them as well, or we don't put a thick coat of paint on the inside like we usually do on the outside.

Many years ago I took a MR Explorer in even worse condition. I got it for free, yes, but it needed much more work. The gunwales were totally rotted and the boat had fallen off the roof of a car going about 45 mph. It was a glass boat (similar to ToughWeave). It has 4 head sized holes - 2 in front of the bow seat and 2 in front of the stern. Plus it had a crack running along the chine about 4 feet long from one of the stern holes. The thing was a mess. I patched the glass, installed Old Town vinyl gunwales (cheap and durable), spray painted it and rebuilt the flotation tanks (yea, they were messed up too). Most of the patching was done in the outside car port of the apartment I lived in at the time. That boat served for several years at the cabin of my Dad's friend in Wabakimi Park in Ontario. Paddled strait and true, never leaked, ran (and swam) class II... it was a great boat. It wintered there for several years protected only by a ridge pole to block falling trees. Jack gave up the cabin several years ago and we brought the canoe back to his house. I'd paddle it and take a trip in it today without hesitation.

To me, the real question is will you get enjoyment out of the rebuild project. For some people, and I put myself in this category, there is nothing like bringing something left for dead back to life. The MR sure was fun to paddle knowing what it had been through and how I brought it back.

Good luck,
John

 

[jish1969]

You make too much sense Dr John. I have to admit that I may a bit of all of the above when it comes to my needs. The Disco 158 suits me well on the rocky rivers by me,(Tioghnioga, Otselic, Susquehanna, Chenango) but I want to do more canoe camping in the Dacks and the Disco can be a pain to portage. Then there are is Cayuga lake where I would want something that tracks better and is faster. There is also the undeniable part of me that wants to get that Sundowner and make it beautiful again. The lighter weight and extra foot of the Sundowner would be nice, but a MR Malecite or Explorer in a lightweight setup would probably most suit my needs. That darn Sundowner just keeps calling though...