Association Forum - Adding forepeak weight

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

Catalina 250 Specific Forum

Adding forepeak weight

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

AADIVER
Admiral

Member Avatar

USA
966 Posts

Initially Posted - 07/15/2007 : 23:01:10

Just back from the 25th annual Catalina Rendezvous at Catalina Island. Despite lumpy seas and no wind it was well worth the motor trip over and back. Lots and lots of "door prize" drawings. I scored the latest ICOM VHS, the IC-M72

118 boats from two 22's to three 470's. Most were 36's and 42's. I was one of four 250's.
I queried the Butlers and Gerry Douglas about the need to add weight in the forepeak to bring a wk 250 down on its waterline and improve performance. They were all unanimous in stating emphatically that weight is NOT needed foreward and that the painted waterline is not the true waterline of the boat, and that performance is NOT improved. So, Arlyn, et al, who's right: the manufacturer or us

Best seminar for me was Lewmar; a demo of how to disassemble, clean, and reassemble our #16 winches.
The weekend was a solid 10 on the 1 to 10 scale.

Frank Farmer
Long Beach, CA
aa.diver@verizon.net
http://mysite.verizon.net/aa.diver

PRETTY PENNY
'01 C-250 WK, Hull #558

Edited by - on

Nautiduck
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3704 Posts

Response Posted - 07/15/2007 : 23:11:41

Frank, sounds like fun. Great score on that icom VHF!!

I added 275 lbs of crushed rock to the bow and I swear it performs better. Why would they purposefully mispaint the waterline??

Edited by - Nautiduck on 07/15/2007 23:13:13

Russ.Johnson
Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
855 Posts

Response Posted - 07/15/2007 : 23:58:55

I think the issue is "performance".
I added an extra water tank below the v-berth on my water-ballast.
It works best when there are 4 people in the cockpit because it helps balance the boat.
It handles better and feels heavier, but it's also slower.
Most people want to improve "performance" by making it faster.
I think adding bow weight is a matter of personal preference.

Edited by - Russ.Johnson on 07/16/2007 11:23:30

britinusa
Web Editor

Members Avatar

USA
5404 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 07:19:00

This 'weight in the bow' issue has been bouncing around for at least a couple of years. At the end of the day, it's the results that indicate the value.

Recently, at the BEER cruise, I was talking with a non-catalina owner about his boat and he decribed the steering issues he was having. I commented that they were very similar to our experience on JD. After describing the solution for us we looked at his boat on the water.

His 'waterline' was clearly not level with the water, but I commented that the true position is when your boat is under sail and with the crew onboard. With both of us ashore looking at his bow, it really seemed high compared to the stern. He climbed aboard and the bow rose by a couple of inches. Then he moved the bow and the bow sat a good 3" lower.

He went to the local depot and got 200lbs of sandbags (a little shy of his own weight) . That weekend he told me that the boat had never handled so well!

We don't often get the chance to view our boats under sail conditions, so photographs from others can be a big help.

In our case, the extra water tank (30gals) in the bow made a huge difference to the balance and the way that the boat cut through waves, the reduction in hull to wave crashes dropped significantly and the boat was easier to keep on track.

Just to complicate the issue, it's not just the crew that affects the balance.
When we go on our 4 night trips, we stock up on food and water. We typically have 48 bottles of water, a few bottles of wine, beer and, of course, food. Then we have a 70lb generator sitting on the fuel locker and 7 gals of fuel by the swim ladder. The Bimini, wheel, pedestal, 2nd battery in the trunk, and the AC unit on the stbd side just aft of the head, tool kits, dry gear in the hanging locker, cushions in the cockpit and don't forget the 'stuff' in the aft berth: mandatory life jackets (we wear our inflatables) the dink, snorkel gear, extra gear; flashlights, fishing gear, and probably a few things not mentioned. It all adds up to a lot of weight from amidships and aft, mostly aft. The outcome is that we still need more weight in the bow!

Empty boat single-handed.. totally different story! (I'm assuming that the weight at the factory considers the outboard.)

It's all empirical!

Paul

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 12:13:47

Actually the bow weight issue has been ongoing since shortly after the wing keel was released in '96.

There have been reports to this forum that the factory encouraged trimming the boat to level the boot stripe in response to inquiry of how to cope with weather helm issues on the 250.

The proof is in the pudding... Frank Butler does not regularly sail a 250 as do many of the participants of this forum.

Keep in mind also that you asked the question with a general Catalina audience and it is possible that affected the answer. What I'm driving at is that adding bow weight is not a generally accepted good thing for a sailboat. The reason is that it generally increases green water over the bow and adds to hobby horsing as it adds balance to hull. A center keeled boat pivots on that heavy mass and if the stern is much heavier than the bow, the stern will tend to stay down and the boat will not hobby horse as bad. When adding bow weight and bring the boat more to balance fore and aft, the boat will hobby horse more because of the better balance and of course the deeper penetration of the bow causes a wetter boat.

As to performance... a dragging stern makes for a slower boat for several reasons with the primary one being increased whetted surface. However, when confronting a seaway a bow down condition makes driving through the seaway more difficult. Also, the faster the boat goes, the more the whetted surface drag factor plays a part in pushing the bow down.

Racers for example in light air, will send crew forward to raise the stern but in heavy stuff they will have the crew aft.

Personally, I've never sailed the wing keel version but I'm the kind of person who listens to and generally trust the observation of others. There have been a great many testimonies on this forum since '96 that trimming the bow down helped reduce weather helm issues on the wing keel model.

Trimming the bow down does have the effect of raking the mast forward in relationship to the keel so might help weather helm in that regard... but the problem with that argument is that early on there were those who went to the trouble to shorten their forestay and lengthen the backstay to reduce weather helm to discover little if any change by those efforts.

As an online observer to the 250 wing keel, I argued that trimming the bow down by longtime established theory would increase weather helm because it reduces the "lead" of the boat by moving CLR forward but those who did it were firm in their observations that the opposite happened.

These observations resulted in a personal challenge to understand how and why the opposite of accepted theory could be happening. After a lot of thought and reading on design, a theory came for why that could be true, which is basically a premise that while the lead is shortened by trimming the bow down, which would allow yaw forces to have an easier time causing weather helm, there must be a significant reduction in yaw forces to show a net gain in weather helm reduction. I discuss a theory of how that could be on my web site.

My final comment is that it must be remembered that the wing keel 250 was not an original design. The 250 was designed to be an internally ballasted trailer sailor but ran into a water ballast acceptance problem. To save the design that had a great deal of appeal otherwise, the wing keel was added. It made some sense because here was a design for interior ballast with significant hull form righting arm so adding a fairly light center keel would make for a light and fast boat especially in light air.

However, such hull forms were relatively new and not fully understood hence for example why Catalina and most other water ballast producers all missed the rudder requirements and had to ultimately increase rudder sizes greatly to control these hull forms.

Those who have read my writings know that I've argued a theory that the heeling footprint causes a lift force with a center that is better balanced when trimming the bow down, thus reducing yaw forces while heeled.

Regarding trimming the bow down, my suggestion for anyone is to test what works best for you.

Edited by - Arlyn Stewart on 07/16/2007 12:18:54

John Russell
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3444 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 12:38:15

Ya know, I read all this stuff and hope that I'm learning something but, for me, it's more reminiscent of airplanes than sailboats......

Over my head.

Edited by - John Russell on 07/16/2007 12:39:42

Bill Arden
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
83 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 14:08:44

We had the opportunity to sail in our first race last Saturday, and one of the local dealers cruised the fleet in a powerboat taking souvenir photos of all the boats. I'll try to post ours, but - in the context of this thread - she looks very nicely trimmed under sail. Prana, a WK boat, has no weight in the bow beyond the fresh-water tank. Maybe there's some truth to the argument that the boat settles down to the painted waterline under sail!

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 15:49:19

John...for good reason because sailboats and airplanes share a lot of dynamics such as balance, drag, lift, foils, control surfaces, need I go on?

Edited by - on

John Russell
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3444 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 16:33:43

Thanks, Arlyn, but for some, ignorance is bliss

Edited by - on

jking
Navigator

Members Avatar

110 Posts

Response Posted - 07/16/2007 : 18:10:37

I had my battery moved to a spot under the V berth, and performance (rudder balance and rounding up in particular) are much improved.

Edited by - on

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.