The 2-33 in question is a unicorn and does not represent reality. Awesome that someone built it. Hilarious that they think there is someone in the world with 75K that shares their vision.
It is worth keeping 2-33s alive. They work, we have plenty of them, lots of clubs can't afford glass trainers. As for keeping them flying. If a guy can't ditch the wife and kids to rebuild a glider then he doesn't have the autonomy to be a soaring pilot. Wives don't value their husband's time by degrees, either he is serving her or himself.
Hour long training flights are overrated. Figure the time between first tow of the day and last. With ground handling/debriefing/pre briefing the next student how many club members can a glider serve in a day if they are all hour long flights?
Granted 2-33s suck in a lot of ways, but most of the problem is pilot vanity. What 2-33s need is a good marketing campaign. Paint shark noses on them or flame jobs, rename them the 'Pilotmaker.' Tell students that NASA trained the original astronauts in 2-33s. If 2-33s were the only gliders we had we'd have tons of fun with them.

On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 8:03:02 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
This looks to be a remanufactured 2-33. I picture this:

They added up the cost of materials, hangar rent, utilities, insurance, and kept track of hours of labor spent. The supervised unskilled labor hours they charged at minimum wage. The skilled labor hours they charged at the prevailing rate. Add 5% a year for their 'cost of money', 5% for their trouble and they get an asking price of $75K. $75K +/- is what a remanufactured 2-33 costs.

This true cost of a remanufactured 2-33 tells me that a long term commitment to 2-33s is throwing good money after bad. You can remanufacture a 2-33 piecemeal, spread out of years, or all at once. Maintaining these birds only makes sense in the long run, when and where people donate hours and hours of their time. Sure that still happens and having trained in 2-33s, I'm grateful and appreciative of their generosity, but the people who have that amount of disposable time are ageing out. Most dads and moms nowadays want to spend their 'time off' with their kids and spouses, not in a hangar covered in dust. And speaking as a recently retired person myself, I have better things to do with my time. (In my defense, I've ponied up money to buy two semi-modern trainers for my club, and I volunteer time at my club.)

Now assuming you find people to donate the time to keep your 2-33 airworthy and cosmetically attractive, what do you get from a student's perspective? How much does a minute in the air cost in a 2-33 compare to a minute in the air in a semi-modern trainer like a ASK 21 or PW-6?

The 32:1 glide ratio is a tipping point. If there is lift to be found, a student can stay up for an hour (and learn to soar) in a 32:1 glider that has decent penetration. They can even fly downwind of the airport! Wow. Who knew?

In a 2-33... they had better find lift under the first cloud that they try. More often than not, they need to buy 2-3 tows to get an hour of practice in the air. On the plus side they get more practice at landing, but we all know that 'gaining altitude in lift' is the heroin that hooks us on the sport. If you want to reduce student attrition during training, put them in a ASK-21 or a PW-6.

If you're wanting a stream of students to subsidize club cash flow by buying lots and lots of tows, a 2-33 does a much better job at that than a 32:1 glider.