[Rhodes22-list] Rummy is right, but I may still need a 110

[Peter Thorn]

Hadz,

Now that you mention it, I did hear about that.  I don't get the connection
to tacking analogies.  Please explain.

PT


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joseph Hadzima" <josef508 at yahoo.com>
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Rummy is right, but I may still need a 110


> Peter you heard that the Cutty Sark was set a blaze, I
> assume?
>
>
> --- Peter Thorn <pthorn at nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Wally,
> >
> > Yeah, I agree with you about furling.  You really hit it
> > on the nose and
> > your comments agree with what most sailmakers have told
> > me.
> >
> > But what about tacking?  1988 R22 Raven came with a 1988
> > Lee 175 sail -- 
> > similar to Rummy's  I guess.  It's almost 5 oz cloth and
> > it so sturdy and
> > heavy it will likely wear forever.  In really light air,
> > the stuff many
> > people won't sail in but I often race in right before the
> > RC cancels the
> > racing for lack of air,  it collapses.  Anyway, tacking
> > Raven's 175 is like
> > tacking the "Cutty Sark" compared to tacking the high
> > clew Doyle 135 that
> > also came with the boat.  Clean, quick tacks.  If the
> > wind is over 8-10,
> > that is definitely my preferred headsail.
> >
> > PT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "TN Rhodey" <tnrhodey at gmail.com>
> > To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:37 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Rummy is right, but I may
> > still need a 110
> >
> >
> > > David,
> > >
> > > Once your start furling any sail the shape and
> > performance is negatively
> > > effected. This is a fact. You can not furl the leading
> > edge flat. Anyone
> > who
> > > tells you a partially furled sails does not have a
> > negative effect on sail
> > > shape is in denial. A 175 furled down to 125 is going
> > to have pretty poor
> > > shape regardless of vendor. Ask the vendor and they
> > will tell you the same
> > > thing (if they are honest). Yes you can make
> > adjustments to limit the
> > > problem but facts are facts. A 155 furled to 125 will
> > pull better than a
> > 175
> > > furled to 125. A 155 at 135 will pull better than a 175
> > furled to
> > > 135......So up to conditions that call for 155 or less
> > the 155 will be the
> > > best sail.
> > >
> > > Now is a 175 furled to 160 better than a 155?
> > Maybe.....maybe not. This
> > may
> > > depend more on point of sail than anything else. Some
> > say the 175
> > maximizes
> > > potenital but in my eyes it is the wrong sail more
> > often than it is the
> > > right one. It does seem to me that those that like the
> > 175 sail have never
> > > tried anything different and typically don't race their
> > boat.
> > >
> > > I don't have a 110 (or a 175) but if you really want a
> > smaller sail for
> > > heavy weather I would consider the 125 or 135. I have a
> > 155 and a 125. The
> > > 125 is the max size that can fit fully unfurled inside
> > the shrouds. It
> > comes
> > > just short of hitting spreaders. This furls down to
> > about a 110 and still
> > > holds shape ok. I have flown a friends sail that looked
> > to me like it
> > would
> > > be close to a 165/175. Great sail off the wind in
> > steady light/med
> > > winds... but really was too heavy for light winds and
> > too much sail for
> > > heavy winds. Many others on this list have complained
> > about the 175 in
> > very
> > > light winds....too heavy and will not hold shape.
> > Another common complaint
> > > with 175 is lee helm.
> > >
> > > It really depends on your own preference and sailing
> > conditions.
> > >
> > > Fair Winds,
> > >
> > > Wally
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/24/07, David Culp <daculp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Rummy:
> > > >
> > > > No doubt the 175 maximizes the potential of the boat
> > design and
> > therefore
> > > > is
> > > > the correct sail for the boat for the majority of
> > owners.  On my narrow,
> > > > long and winding lake with its fickle winds, I very
> > rarely get to enjoy
> > it
> > > > fully unfurled for long periods.  It has happened on
> > a few days and it
> > was
> > > > great.  When I can get a steady enough wind to keep
> > it filled but not so
> > > > strong as to require reducing its size I have been
> > impressed with
> > > > performance and have learned to tack it fairly well.
> > The terrain around
> > > > here also causes many wind direction changes and the
> > result is almost
> > > > constant sail trimming.  You can be drifting one
> > minute in 6 kts, and
> > then
> > > > around the next bend be reefing in 20.  This is not a
> > sailing lake, at
> > > > least
> > > > not for boats with big gennies or spinnakers.  In
> > fact, in 5 years I
> > have
> > > > only seen one spinnaker flown and it was me flying it
> > from a friend's
> > > > Flying
> > > > Scot.
> > > >
> > > > You're right, I for one, admit that I do not know how
> > to use the 175
> > > > properly and if I ever want to really learn how, I am
> > going to have to
> > > > trailer to a better locale where I can get on some
> > steady runs and
> > > > experiment with it.   This year is my second season
> > and I am really
> > > > working
> > > > the traveler a lot more and that has been a help with
> > it.  I am going to
> > > > get
> > > > a pole and attach it to the shrouds as you suggest.
> > This will help me
> > > > greatly on light wind days to keep the sail presented
> > properly to the
> > > > wind.
> > > > In moderate winds, I usually have no problems wing
> > and wing.
> > > >
> > > > It might be better for me in my locale to change out
> > the furler to the
> > CDI
> > > > which allows sail changes because I would not want to
> > give up having the
> > > > 175
> > > > for those special days.  I'm guessing a 110 would be
> > the most useful and
> > > > also guessing that it would furl out to just past the
> > upper shroud area.
> > > > Anyone have a 110 and can tell me where the clew
> > extends to when fully
> > > > unfurled?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > David
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 07:46:08 EDT
> > > > From: R22RumRunner at aol.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Genoa size and usage
> > > > To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
> > > > Message-ID: <d36.8802f0d.3386d500 at aol.com>
> > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> > > >
> > > > David,
> > > > Instead of attaching the whisker pole to the special
> > eye on the front of
> > > > the
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list