Association Forum - 250 WB vs WK

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

General Sailing Forum

250 WB vs WK

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

LJ
Deckhand

Member Avatar

USA
4 Posts

Initially Posted - 05/30/2003 : 00:11:29

We are NEW to sailing. Have focused on the C 250. Need pro & con on
the water ballast vs wing keel. Would appreciate any and all comments
prior to making final decision. We are located in Yuba City Ca.
If anyone is close by would appreciate discussion. cell # 916 600-0964
LJ

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 05/30/2003 : 00:18:43

Generally, the wing is chosen if the boat will be slipped or moored... If trailered very often, the water ballast.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

lcharlot
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Antigua and Barbuda
1301 Posts

Response Posted - 05/30/2003 : 00:24:17

We have several C-250's in our sailing club, Catalina 22 Fleet 4, based at Folsom Lake. If you would like to come to our annual picnic, which is in two weeks at Folsom Lake Brown's Ravine Picnic area, I could introduce you to Paul Butler, Carl DeWing, and Steve Watkins, who between them have two Water Ballast C-250's and a Wing Keel C-250. Yuba City is not too far away, and this picnic is in fact an Open House for our club, so you would be more than welcome to join us. send me an e-mail to: lgcharlot@hotmail.com and I will send you times and directions.

Larry Charlot
Catalina 25 #1205 "Quiet Time"
Sacramento, CA

Edited by - lcharlot on 05/30/2003 00:26:50

Edited by - on

Dave B
Admiral

Members Avatar

Mali
863 Posts

Response Posted - 05/30/2003 : 23:45:46

A less obvious difference that I don't recall seeing in a brochure is that the wing version has considerably more headroom (10"?) than the water ballast, due to the lack of a ballast tank allowing the floor to be lower.

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 #5032 "Passage" SR/FK/Dinette/Honda in SW CT

Edited by - on

MattL
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
990 Posts

Response Posted - 05/31/2003 : 00:27:57

Larry,
What is the date of your open house, maybe I can talk my wife into toting the boat up there and LJ can try a fin keel too.

Matt/Brigitte Loeffler
E.C. Rider
Cat 25 86'
FK/SR _/)

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 10:06:26

Dave, your point about headroom is an interesting one. First, because we've seen different numbers ranging from 7-10 inches. Second, because the difference is not all the result of the ballast tank... either the deck or hull was different on the wing having a bit more freeboard.

Now both the water ballast and the wing use the deck mold of the wing. Its likely that their could be several variations of height with later water ballast models having slightly more headroom than earlier ones.

At any rate, IMHO once headroom limits the ability to stand... its not too big a deal on just how much that is. The far bigger issue is seating comfort, the ability to sit erect. And, that is not a problem on either model.

Of course, Catalina has always recognized the importance of pop tops and the abililty to stand erect while at the galley. The all weather pop top cover on the C250 is a somewhat ugly looking thing... but what it lacks in looks, it makes up for in function.

My last comment on ergonomics...I've stated before... but will repeat for prospective buyers. Choosing the wheel was a hard decision for me...and I finally went with the wheel not even knowing what would become its single most redeeming value. The wheel has the effect of offering the crew good standing exercise and I doubt that I could emphasize adequately the degree this goes in making the boat more comfortable for extended cruising.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 17:44:16

In addition to the increased headroom, the wing does not have the centerboard pully system behind the companion waystairs which are fixed on the Water Ballast whereas on the wing they swing up and out of the way, all of which allows for easier entry into the aft berth on the wing.

Again it's a trailering condsideration, because the WB sits much lower on the trailer and is thus easier to launch.

We have the WB, because we trailer all the time. The kids are in the aft berth and don't know the difference, and the pop tup is up most of the time, even in calm air without the "tent' in willful violation of the owners manual, so the headroom is minimized.

Bottom line is that 1200 lbs less to trailer for thousands of miles makes a difference.

Another major difference between the two is where the shrouds attach to the deck, (cabintop-wing vs. hull to deck joint on the WB.) The result is that the largest jib possible on the WB is a 117, before it starts runnung into the spreaders when close hauled. The boat actually comes with a 110. The solution is the Ullman reacher drifter for light air. But, that's another 7.5 BU's......

Oscar
<img src="http://www.woodenshoemusic.com/Images/familypics/LKforumshot.jpg" border=0>
Lady Kay 250 WB #618
In the driveway in Behtlehem, PA ready to go anytime.

Edited by - Oscar on 06/01/2003 17:47:40

Edited by - Oscar on 06/01/2003 17:59:36

Edited by - on

Dave B
Admiral

Members Avatar

Mali
863 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 20:53:39

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
...the difference is not all the result of the ballast tank... either the deck or hull was different on the wing having a bit more freeboard.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
Arlyn: I believe the difference in freeboard is due to the sailing displacement of the wing keel being lower than the WB. With the ballast so much lower in the wing than it is inside the hull, considerably less ballast is required. Also, the wing itself displaces more water than the centerboard. The problem is that Catalina doesn't admit to how much ballast is in the WB--of course, the number depends a little on whether you're in salt or fresh water.

Anyway, I think the boat just floats higher. I haven't done it, but to check my theory, you could measure the waterline from the top and the bottom at the transom and the bow. Maybe I'm all wet! <img src=icon_smile_blackeye.gif border=0 align=middle>

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 #5032 "Passage" SR/FK/Dinette/Honda in SW CT

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 22:13:09

Dave, the wing does float higher and therefore has that degree of increased freeboard... but not long ago...Catalina revealed that the deck mold of the wing actually had more freeboard than that of the water ballast...

However, now we've been told that 2003 model water ballast now use the same deck mold as the wing.

As far as the ballast numbers for the water ballast model... I think they have always been published at around 1200 lbs with an additional 90 lbs most of it being lead at the bottom of the six foot center board.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 22:26:56

Oscar... does your boat have a CDI or Shaefer furler?

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 22:46:15

CDI....hence the jib halyard being available for the drifter <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

>the wing does float higher and therefore has that degree of increased freeboard<

That should not affect the interior space though.....<img src=icon_smile_question.gif border=0 align=middle>

Guess I could take her to the scales, weigh her, then fill er up with a hose and weigh her again. That should give us the weight of the ballast.

Meanwhile I'm still waiting for the e-mail from Frank Butler I was going to receive first thing Friday morning....guess it's time to throw another grenade.....

In anticipation of finally having someone look at the "List", Frank mentioned that if it was indeed determined that quote "we screwed up" (ie. Catalina) the solution would be to put in lead.
Now, based on the fact that it takes 160+ pounds (me) leaning outboard at the port spreaders to straighten her out, that would mean 200 or so pounds in the port settee......is that why I bought a water ballast? Should I accept that?

Oscar
250WB#618 Lady Kay on the Chesapeake:
<img src="http://www.woodenshoemusic.com/Images/familypics/Forumshots/chesapeake.jpg" border=0>

Edited by - Oscar on 06/01/2003 22:47:53

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 22:54:24

Sorry LJ......this thread got off on a tangient...as usual. Guys just can't stop yappin' 'bout their boats.

You say you're new to sailing.....have you done any boating? Have you considered spending a weekend (or more) at your local ASA School?(no, not the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the American Sailing Association)

http://www.american-sailing.com/

It's fun, and learning the hard way on a sailboat can hurt.

Oscar
<img src="http://www.woodenshoemusic.com/Images/familypics/LKforumshot.jpg" border=0>
Lady Kay 250 WB #618
In the driveway in Behtlehem, PA ready to go anytime.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 23:40:04

Thanks for the response to the furler question...

Regarding your list... you cruise a fair amount... why not make the added ballast something usefull...like increased battery capacity (70lbs), shifting the fresh water tank from center towards port (net gain of 30-40 lbs), a marine head and holding tank... with the tank in the area just aft of the wet locker (likely 100lbs when full). 16.5 lb claw anchor, chain and rode in port cockpit locker (35 lbs).

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Chip Hunt
Navigator

Members Avatar

120 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 23:41:16

i could be mistaken, but i am under the impression that a wing-keeled boat will point a bit better than a water ballasted swing-keeled boat. the wk will also be much more stable when seas build. if you are on a lake, i dont think you would have to worry about that, but if you are in coastal waters, you should take this into consideration.

Edited by - on

bren737
Captain

Members Avatar

291 Posts

Response Posted - 06/01/2003 : 23:53:47

Hi, Gang. . .

This is from a post I made in a very similar thread to this one back in October:

I was on the phone to Catalina about something today and had just read your post, Arlyn. I was curious about the 250s (WB and WK) coming from the same mold, yet the WK having more freeboard than the WB. Since I had him on the phone I asked David Krauss (250 tech support) about it and after double-checking with Frank, he called me back and reported this:

The 250 WB and WK do share the same basic hull form in regard to wetted surface (waterline down), with the obvious subtle differences at the centerboard trunk/keel fairing. However, since the additional stability of the lead keel allows for a higher cabin top (and freeboard) they do not actually come from the same mold. There is one production mold each for the WK and WB. All boats built come from these respective molds. The deck/cabin tops are the same and come from the same mold for both models. The difference in freeboard is plus four inches on the WK. He said the additional cabin headroom in the WK results from a combination of the higher deck/cabin top (resulting from the additional freeboard) and the lower floor (resulting from the lack of a water ballast tank).

Maybe this can help with the freeboard/headroom debate. . .

At any rate, I concur, it seems to be mostly a matter of how often you trailer. While I don't completely break down the boat to trailer 'Ruah' out of the marina that often, since I dry-slip her, I can attest the the fact that the WB is (IMHO) definitely the way to go if you trailer anything more than once a year or so. With the guides I added to the trailer recently to help with crosswinds, launching/recovering the WB is a piece of cake.

Bren Peterson
C250WB, #642, "Ruah"
San Antonio, TX

Edited by - on

LJ
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
4 Posts

Response Posted - 06/02/2003 : 00:21:00

Oscar,
yes we have taken 3 levels of ASA classes recently in the
San Juan Island are. Just enough to go learn I think. We have listened
to so many "SALES" type people but found the owners forum and thought I would put it out there.
Now since putting it out there I have run across a 25' swing keel circa 1985. Much less money. Our long range plan is a lot of trailering once retired.
The responses so far have made for interesting reading and educational. Thanks.
Lee Taylor "LJ"

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/02/2003 : 08:24:31

Thanks Bren... that clears up the confusion.

Chip, the jury is still out on pointing. We've really not had heads up racing reports adequate to draw conclusions about pointing.

However, that is not true for the older C25. Their swing keel is known to outpoint the wing.

Opposite to your offering, it has generally been speculated that this will be true for the c250 as well as the wing has less lateral keel surface and higher freeboard. It may be however that additional head sail on the wing will overcome those differences.

What does seem to be emerging is that the wing will outperform the water ballast on a closed course. The water ballast with greater wetted surface and deeper draft is more sluggish off wind, this combined with a smaller headsail leaves it giving substantial ground to the wing.

I'd encourage reports from races which include both designs. The reports should include the headsails used on each boat and the wind conditions.

Either Derek or Steve made an interesting point a while back that it may be that no one has yet really dialed in the best abilities of the c250. Racing prep is an art... getting the last bit of speed from a variety of interacting systems on a boat is both interesting and challenging.

Remembering back to my Hobie 18 racing days, we had several boats about evenly matched with skipper abilities so the winner was usually the lucky one who found the best air on a given day. I changed that however by investing about a week in racing prep on the boat after which I began to win more and in equal conditions... had a speed edge.

Some of those efforts were to wet sand the hulls, fine tune the sail pocket by sanding batten strips, place marks on the adjustable battens for various wind conditions, fine tuning the mast rake to provide a slight weather helm, developing a standing rig tension plan for various wind strengths, setting an ideal rudder rake, place marks on the outhaul and mast rotator for various wind conditions, etc. Those little things all added slightly to boat speed and gave an edge... not enough to save from dumb mistakes... but enough to make my boat the fastest when going heads up.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Gloss
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1916 Posts

Response Posted - 06/02/2003 : 17:21:14

Does anybody know how initial stability, or final stability, or righting moment is quantified on a sailboat? I was wondering this as I have heard that the wing has more of all the types of stability.
Also, don't rule out an 88 or 89 wing keel boat as an option, if you can find one.
Good luck, and have fun with whatever you buy, and come back and join this classy, smart, fun loving, and most of all humble, and certainly non opinionated group. Well worth the cost of admission.

Frank Gloss
89WK/TR

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/06/2003 : 15:48:13

Frank, a fairly simple explanation is done by Doug King... an engineer type that has participated on the Trailer Sailor site for many years.

http://www.trailersailor.com/content/features/read.cgi?14

A google search on sailboat stability will yield good reading.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Dave B
Admiral

Members Avatar

Mali
863 Posts

Response Posted - 06/06/2003 : 21:42:41

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
...a marine head and holding tank... with the tank in the area just aft of the wet locker (likely 100lbs when full)...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Good idea! Keep that tank FULL! <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 #5032 "Passage" SR/FK/Dinette/Honda in SW CT

Edited by - on

LJ
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
4 Posts

Response Posted - 06/07/2003 : 00:09:21

Frank, I see you trailer a 89 WK. I located an 88 WK with trailer.
Is a WK harder to launch and retrieve than a SK?
"LJ" Lee Taylor

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/07/2003 : 09:00:07

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Good idea! Keep that tank FULL! <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Ya got me...

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Gloss
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1916 Posts

Response Posted - 06/07/2003 : 09:18:18

I have never trailer sailed a swing keel. I do know that a wing keel draws 2 inches more. Furthermore, due to the wing I didn't get drop axles, I don't know if I could have used them or not. with drop axles you can lower the boat even more. Getting the boat closer to the water is really important. I need a steep ramp, if not it doesn't float very well. I'm thinking of some kind of extension for the tongue, mine didn't come with one. the other day on a shallow ramp I really had to back into the water, even getting my differential partially in the water. Not good. I'll use a steeper ramp next time, and I'm also going to tilt my boat on the trailer a little rearwards, maybe it will help.

Frank Gloss
89WK/TR

Edited by - on

Gloss
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1916 Posts

Response Posted - 06/07/2003 : 09:21:52

Arlyn,
I have seen this treatise on stability before. My impression is that this was an attempt to justify water ballast. I still would like to see the numbers comparing the stability of the WB vs WK vs SK vs FK.
Being a former engineering type myself, I like to see data.

Frank Gloss
89WK/TR

Edited by - on

HGraham
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
21 Posts

Response Posted - 06/08/2003 : 20:11:57

Frank;
I have to have a steep ramp for our 250WB, or it just doesn't work. At the local reservoir, the ramp traffic is heavy, so in and out quickly is the rule.
The trailer came with the mast-up system, which is great......we do that at the dry-slip, but there is no tongue extension.
We tow with a Ford Explorer 6-cyl 4X4, and that pulls it out just fine. However, I have to back in up to the doors to get the trailer deep enough (blub-blub). You mentioned getting the differential wet. Well I think our transfer case is under water.
I know that hot bearings, seals, etc, in cold water is asking for problems, but we've been sinking the tow vehicle for years with no apparent problems.
Any in-sight on what could potentially happen from almost floating the tow vehicle? (other than guarenteed wet feet every time)

Thanks, Harry

Ovation C250WB#543

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2984 Posts

Response Posted - 06/08/2003 : 22:39:45

Hey Harry,

It is possible that the 4X4 trailer hitch height is too high. The 250 w/b can normally be easily launched from most ramps. Shoot for around 17 inches of ball height.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

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.