bertram31.com

Is the 1962 fly bridge screen the same size as the 1975 model? I have never seen this question on this site. Have a good year everyone and God bless Donald Trump our next president, he will need all the help he can get.

If by screen you refer to the plexi wind screen, I think that around 1967 (?) the 31 bridge became wider.
Therefore the windscreen became wider too.
Look in pics of the two boat models in yachtworld and you may get your answer.

I'm going to measure 3 boats today, but the early boats have no construction year on them.

My son got in touch with the Bertram people and found out there was no change to the flybridge screen. It has always remained the same.

ed c. wrote:My son got in touch with the Bertram people and found out there was no change to the flybridge screen. It has always remained the same.

Just remember that some of the current Bertram people know jack shit about the older Berties... Use one of these:

The longest measurement from bolt hole to bolt hole, stern side is 62". By the way my son was dealing with Morgan Bertram.

Yannis

I have been on older and newer 31's and have never seen a size difference in the bridge. The original screen was Taylor made and if you check the for sale section, you will find one that was put up for sale about a month ago.

The size might be the same, but the question is is the bolt alignment the same.

Tony, Ed,

I'm pretty sure the fb size changed at some point.
Where it seems I've been wrong, is that it may not have been on a 31, but on some other similar size boat model.
I don't know why I thought it was a 31. I'll try to find out which one I meant.
Thank you for the correction.

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/boatreviews/ ... _31_sf.htm

Pascoe mentions in this article that the bridge on later models was "mercifully widened" ...
He doesn't say when exactly, or by how much.

ed c. wrote:The longest measurement from bolt hole to bolt hole, stern side is 62". By the way my son was dealing with Morgan Bertram.

Morgan is a very nice guy (I've met him personally) but AFAIK he's part of the sales team... I.e. not necessarily that knowledgeable about technical specifics...

Yannis wrote:http://www.yachtsurvey.com/boatreviews/ ... _31_sf.htm

Pascoe mentions in this article that the bridge on later models was "mercifully widened" ...
He doesn't say when exactly, or by how much.

Exactly... And I can't see how they widened the bridge without widening the screen...

I don't believe the bridge was ever widened. But I have seen a couple of flybridge boats where the bridge was added as separate part.

I am not sure if there was ever time where Bertram or another company offered a bridge to add the hardtop models.

It is true that Morgan Bertram is on the sales/marketing side, but I was able to spend a lot of time with him at the NC Rendezvous this past summer. He cares deeply about the heritage and history of the 31 that his dad made famous, and he's done a ton of research on the boat that he grew up around. We spent time going through my archives collection and I can tell he desires to be accurate on matters relating to the 31.

Tommy wrote:It is true that Morgan Bertram is on the sales/marketing side, but I was able to spend a lot of time with him at the NC Rendezvous this past summer. He cares deeply about the heritage and history of the 31 that his dad made famous, and he's done a ton of research on the boat that he grew up around. We spent time going through my archives collection and I can tell he desires to be accurate on matters relating to the 31.

No disrespect was meant... As I said, I met the guy and I find him very likable...

Nav, your post did not come across as disrespectful. Regarding the flybridge width, my observation of photos of the 1961 B-31 (first production year) look identical to later models relative to the bridge and the windscreen. I also read the Pascoe article that referred to the bridge being widened, but cannot find photo evidence supporting the claim. With that said, I have not pulled a tape as Nav points out, which would answer the question. It would be great if owners of different year models would post measurements to settle once and for all.

Tommy,

On the other hand, if someone reads at Pascoe's that it has been widened, then anybody can claim that it has.
I suspect from the various pics, that it has indeed gotten wider by 20 cm which divided by two gives 10 cm or 4 inches per side.
Imperceptible if you just jump into a later 31 .
Again, thats what I read, if its false then anybody can be.
I havent talked to any Bertram employee, current or older.

Yannis

Pascoe has never been kind to our little boats. For some reason he really does not like them.

But I will still say, the bridge on my 75 is the same width that my late friends 67 had. I spent a lot of time on and running his boat and outside of his having duel controls and mine single, everything else was identical. I would say if someone has one from the earlier 60's we could then settle this question.

I do know, that well into the 70's if you needed a windscreen you just needed to contact taylor. That is why I think the bridge has always been the same.

Time to see if there is something buried out there on the web.

Tony Meola wrote:Pascoe has never been kind to our little boats. For some reason he really does not like them.

Pascoe has tons of experience but some of the things he brings to the table as fact are subjective opinions... He's very opinionated which means that his reviews quickly look more like criticisms... Having said that, when you read more of his reviews and start to get a feel for his writing you start reading between the lines... Furthermore, I find that consistency is not one of his strong points... In one Bertram review he implies that practically all Bertrams are used hard, in another he states there are many that have never been fished... As another example, he recommends DD 6V92's (maybe a typo?) as upgrades for DD 8V71's on a Bertram 46 whereas at the same time he recommends DD 6V92's as replacements for DD 8V71's...

Just like in other matters, never trust a single guru!... They're human and therefore, by definition, fallible...