[Rhodes22-list] Boat Weight on Trailer
kroposki
kroposki at innova.net
Sun Mar 14 11:43:50 EST 2004
Wally:
The new diamond board weighs a lot more that the center board on
my 84. Add that to your list.
Ed K
-----Original Message-----
From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
[mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Wally Buck
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 10:05 AM
To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
Subject: RE: Weight Re: [Rhodes22-list] back to Gennys ....Bullshit.
Hey PT thanks for the sound advice. I was wondering the same thing as
Mary
Lou, is that with single axle trailer?
I have seen an 84 spec sheet from GB and the weight was listed back then
at
2700. I am not sure when it jumped to 2900. I am thinking that this must
be
the fully enclosed marine head weight but I am not sure.
I do know that gear adds weight fast; toss in a motor, a couple of
batteries, a bunch of electronic goodies, grills, large propane tanks,
pop
top enclosure, boom room, and so on.
Wally
>From: Mary Lou Troy <mltroy at verizon.net>
>Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>Subject: Weight Re: [Rhodes22-list] back to Gennys ....Bullshit.
>Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 08:43:50 -0500
>
>Pete - was there anything else on board when you weighed Phoenix? I
assume
>you subtracted the trailer weight. 3300 is 400 over the published
weight -
>though I'm not sure there was ever an R22 that weighed 2900 lbs. Maybe
>without the mast? We've never weighed Fretless but she's a '91 so we've
>always figured she was on the heavy side though perhaps not as heavy as
the
>boats with the permanent head, holding tank and head enclosure.
>
>Mary Lou
>
>At 08:04 AM 3/14/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>Wally,
>>
>>I think it's great that you are enjoying racing, and have learned you
can
>>PHRF race with bigger boats and beat them. Go Wally!
>>
>>As for the genny selection, I'm with Steve on this... get the 155. It
>>makes
>>a great deal of sense NOT to penalize yourself to start with a worse
>>(lower)
>>rating just because of the perceived benefit a bigger sail implies,
but
>>really only comes into play in light air conditions. Around here
(lake
>>sailing; no seabreeze), the best racing is in the winter anyway, where
the
>>155 would be preferable for winter's fresh breezes. You can probably
furl
>>a
>>155 down to about a 110 with a tapered luff pad and have a little sail
>>shape
>>left to race with. Also, a 155 is still considered a "light air"
sail.
>>
>>Another important consideration is clew height. A higher clewed
headsail
>>furls easier and gives you move visibility under the foot to view the
>>crossing approaching traffic, so you would not need a window. Many
>>racer/cruisers seem to like these features. However, due to geometry,
a
>>higher clewed 155 would extend much farther aft than a decksweeper
155.
>>Also, with a decksweeper I've heard talk about "end plate" effect with
the
>>wind on the deck. Plus the sail's center of effort is lower and more
>>forward so it's easier to hold down.. I just mention these points to
you
>>so
>>you can have a good discussion with your sailmaker.
>>
>>My 84 R22, the Phoenix, is on shoring supports in the yard patiently
>>waiting
>>for her "make-over". It will probably be two years before she is
ready to
>>launch, with other work and sailing distractions in my que ahead of
her.
>>Just for the record, on the trip to NC, the Phoenix weighed in at
3,300
>>pounds at a highway truck scale. Seems heavy for an old boat, don't
you
>>think?
>>
>>Fair winds,
>>
>>PT
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Bill,
>> >
>> > As I mentioned in an earlier post it would be nice to be able to
test
>>sail
>> > before you buy. I also said I am trying to keep an open mind.
>> >
>> > I am not confusing discomfort with speed. Any decent sailor knows
that
>>a
>> > boat heeling excessively is not at optimum trim. Sure the race
>>committee
>> > penalizes you for head sails larger than a 155. I agree that a 175
can
>>be
>>a
>> > faster sail. I am just not sure the advantage is at 20 knots of
true
>>wind.
>> > That being said I have never sailed with one and I am looking for
the
>>best
>> > sail for about 8 - 12.
>> >
>> > I don't have a wind gauge or knot meter. I guess at wind speed when
>>pleasure
>> > sailing and rely on the committee boat to announce and record wind
>>speed
>> > when racing. I measure boat speed with my GPS. I am also trying to
use
>>the
>> > VMG features.
>> >
>> > Many variables to consider but Rummy and I both have an 84. I don't
>>think
>>my
>> > boat is loaded down much at all, can't speak for Rummy's. Earlier
posts
>>did
>> > not mention hanky mains when sailing in 20. I know that I need to
furl
>>main
>> > and my 125 when sailing in 20 knots. If I make the main too small
it
>>seems
>> > like I have eliminated the slot and there is no lift provided. I
might
>>as
>> > well just furl all of the way.
>> >
>> > PS - Just got back from a nice 24 mile sail. Picture perfect with
about
>>10
>> > -15. Too bad I didn't have a 175 to play with. :-)
>> >
>> > Wally
>> >
>> >
>> > >From: "Bill Effros" <bill at effros.com>
>> > >Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> > >To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Bullshit.
>> > >Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 14:29:03 -0500
>> > >
>> > >Roger,
>> > >
>> > >I use a hand held anemometer, also, and, like you, I know people
often
>> > >overestimate wind speed. But, again, like you, I do not.
>> > >
>> > >The mistake we sometimes make is in thinking that all of our boats
and
>> > >conditions are the same. But, as I recall, your boat does not
have
>>IMF,
>> > >your mainsail has battens, you do not have a 175 genny, your boat
is
>> > >considerably lighter in weight than boats of more recent vintage,
you
>>do
>> > >not normally sail in currents, and you do not normally sail in
>>conditions
>> > >where you can stay on a single tack for hours on end in a steady,
>> > >non-gusting wind.
>> > >
>> > >"Bullshit" is rather a strong technical term when so many
different
>>factors
>> > >could be involved.
>> > >
>> > >I asked Wally if he has a standard or IMF main because in my
>>experience
>>it
>> > >is the main sail that controls heel, and the genny that provides
the
>>power
>> > >on my boat. In strong winds I roll up the main far enough so the
boat
>> > >sails upright. Sometimes this results in a stupid looking "hanky"
>>coming
>> > >out of my IMF slot. I leave the 175 all the way out. There isn't
>>another
>> > >boat on Long Island Sound that has its sails set even remotely
like
>> > >mine--but my boat goes like a bat out of hell--in total comfort,
>>completely
>> > >under control.
>> > >
>> > >I don't like to lower the boom, and rarely do so. I reduce main
sail
>>size
>> > >instead. I don't race, I don't sail triangular courses. I can
set an
>> > >interesting tack and stay with it all day, and with any luck I can
>>reverse
>> > >the tack and sail all the way home.
>> > >
>> > >If Wally had said he has a standard mail sail, I would not
necessarily
>> > >recommend the 175 for his boat. But since he says he has the IMF,
I
>>would.
>> > > The race committees are right. The 175 genny is going to make
the
>>boat
>>a
>> > >faster boat.
>> > >
>> > >Many people don't know how fast they're going through the water,
>>either.
>> > >They tend to confuse discomfort with speed. It feels much faster
when
>>you
>> > >are petrified about tipping over. But an R-22 is designed to sail
>>upright,
>> > >and if you can measure the speed you will see it goes faster
upright
>>than
>> > >heeled, all other conditions being equal. Ask Jay about this.
>> > >
>> > >Furthermore, the characteristics of a fully extended 175 genny
outside
>>the
>> > >shrouds are substantially different from the characteristics of a
125
>>fully
>> > >extended genny inside the shrouds.
>> > >
>> > >If it is important to me to point higher I will move the sail
inside
>> > >shrouds, but the amount of sail available in those conditions is
>> > >substantially less than is available with smaller sails cut to the
>>purpose.
>> > >
>> > >Returning from all these digressions to what is actually my main
>>point:
>> > >because we are all owners of Rhodes-22 sailboats we frequently
forget
>>that
>> > >there are substantial and important differences between our boats.
I
>>don't
>> > >have the time to mention it every time I see it, but it disturbs
me
>>when
>>I
>> > >see forceful writers or experienced sailors try to bludgeon others
>>into
>> > >accepting their points of view, which may not be valid for all
other
>> > >members of the list.
>> > >
>> > >Bill Effros
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >----- Original Message -----
>> > >From: Roger Pihlaja
>> > >To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
>> > >Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 10:16 AM
>> > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Bullshit.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Rummy,
>> > >
>> > >It is when folks claim things that are physically impossible. The
>>force
>> > >available from the wind on the sails is proportional to the
>> > >[Wind Speed]^2. How is it that my Rhodes 22 is healed over at 30
deg
>>with
>> > >the rails awash at about 12 -15 knots of wind when sailing an
upwind
>>beat
>>&
>> > >yet other Rhodes 22's claim to be able to carry full sail up to 20
>>knots?
>> > >This means that; somehow, these other Rhodes 22's are able to
stand up
>> > >against a heeling force that is [20]^2 / [15]^2 = 1.78X the
heeling
>>force
>> > >that knocks my Rhodes 22 down on its rail. I don't think so! The
>>more
>> > >likely explanation is incorrect wind speed estimation. Since I
use a
>>hand
>> > >held anemometer and calibrate every year, I believe my data.
Again,
>>get
>> > >yourself an anemometer, measure the wind speed, & show me your
data.
>>We
>> > >can
>> > >argue until the cows come home, but I won't believe your anecdotal
>>examples
>> > >over my own data. I think you will be surprised how much you are
>> > >overestimating the wind speed.
>> > >
>> > >Roger Pihlaja
>> > >S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
>> > >
>> > >----- Original Message -----
>> > >From: <R22RumRunner at aol.com>
>> > >To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> > >Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 9:22 AM
>> > >Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Bullshit.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > Dear Roger,
>> > > > The next time you are in this area, stop in and let's go
sailing.
>>Until
>> > >then,
>> > > > Bullshit is not an appropriate term to be used on this list.
You
>>bring
>> > >the
>> > > > rum.
>> > > >
>> > > > Rummy
>> > > > __________________________________________________
>> > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >__________________________________________________
>> > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> > >__________________________________________________
>> > >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> >
>> > _________________________________________________________________
>> > Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win
$1000!
>> >
>>http://msn.careerbuilder.com/promo/kaday.htm?siteid=CBMSN_1K&sc_extcmp
=JS_JASweep_MSNHotm2
>> >
>> > __________________________________________________
>> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
_________________________________________________________________
One-click access to Hotmail from any Web page - download MSN Toolbar
now!
http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list