Association Forum - Ballast vs Wing Keel

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

Ballast vs Wing Keel

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

rik9393
Deckhand

Member Avatar

4 Posts

Initially Posted - 06/24/2003 : 21:10:20

I am looknig for a 25 Cat and had several brokers including the local Cat dealer tell me not to buy a water ballast boat.

I would appreciate any feedback on this.

What years were wing keels made.

Rik R.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 06/24/2003 : 22:54:45

Rik... First, C25's were produced between about '68 thru '91. Catalina's 25 foot offering then was redesigned to the C250 in '94. The first 230 were built as water ballast and then the wing was released. Some bias existed early on about water ballast... however, the criteria for a decision between them is trailerability... The water ballast boat was designed for ease of hauling, launch and retrieve. Other wise, the wing version has less compromises... it offers more head room, easier access to the aft berth and less maintenance issues relative to the center board. The wing version will trailer... but not as easy.

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

rik9393
Deckhand

Members Avatar

4 Posts

Response Posted - 06/25/2003 : 23:35:05

Arlyn

Thanks for the information. What is a "230" and could you relate the compromises on the water ballast.

Thanks

Rik

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 06/25/2003 : 23:44:20

Rik,

Arlyn meant 250...(typo)

The WB versus Wing has a little less headroom, and a little less storage in settees and under V/aft berth. Also the companion way stairs end in a "box" and are fixed. The wing also does not have the centerboard tackle behind the stairs. So you cannot open up the aft berth as much on the WB as the WK....The size of the berth is the same.

You'll find the good the bad and the ugly on this forum. Regarding the water ballast/wing keel issue, there's a lot of back and forth, and it is indeed a decision to make after weighing all the pro's and cons. Having said that, I'm not aware of any informed buyers (including myself) regretting the decision to buy the WB.
There are, to my knowledge, no major technical concerns with the WB system, or it's effects on performance of the boat in the water.

As Arlyn says, If you trailer a lot, it's great to leave the 1200 or so pounds of ballast in the water.....if you don't trailer the impact on interior space is something to be appreciated.

There's enough of these around. Check them both out.....

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 06/25/2003 23:49:50

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 06/26/2003 : 05:26:17

Rik... I see that I didn't fully answer your question about wing keels and that it may have related to the C25 as well as the c250.

Wing C25's were first produced in the mid '80s in response to a need for a shoal draft that got away from the heavy swing keel that had shown some design shortcomings. The C25 however was discontinued in '91 when sales continued to be very soft for the model... The problem was two fold, yacht sales were off and the market was full of good used boats.
New sales would have to hit a niche that wasn't available in used boats... and Catalina followed MacGregor in producing a water ballast 25 footer, the C250 designed specifically for easy trailering but with some big boat feel.

This boat was released in '94 and its first offerings were '95 models. They geared production up fairly strong with many dealers taking shipments and produced better than 200 boats in '95. Handling problems due mostly to rudder issues were often blamed on water ballast. Some soothsayers argued that water was not a worthy ballast material, others scoffed at the divergence in design such as no exterior teak, etc. The boat was literally picked almost to its death, with almost every innovative aspect challenged. One such was the open transom... salty sailors echoed over and over again they wouldn't be caught dead with an open transom. Others scoffed it’s modern lines.

Sales were disappointing; some boats sat several years hunting an owner. Several new owners gave up on the boat after a year or so of ownership. Catalina however believed in the design... and added a wing keel version in response to dealers who couldn't sell the water ballast. Sales of the wing initially were promising. However, it became apparent the wing didn't solve the issue that had given water ballast the bad rap... handling problems.

Now that the blame was off water ballast, the handling issues were dealt with by redesigned rudders, an additional reef point and education about sailing the boat flatter... the water ballast model began to be appreciated for what she was, a 25 foot boat that was easy to trailer, setup, launch and retrieve. A boat that could easily be trailered a long distance, and provide a cruising platform capable of the Great Lakes, and many other coastal cruising waters, a boat large enough to comfortably and safely cruise for a few weeks at a time and easily haulable by the venerable half ton pickup truck. Sales of water ballast returned… those that had been idle, found owners.

Who is the C250 water ballast meant for? By design, the boat is intended for those who will be trailering regularly. Because of its centerboard design, it sets low on the trailer and is easy to launch and retrieve. I found it easier than the C22. Dropping the ballast makes great sense when hauling the boat 2,600 miles round trip yearly for a summer sailing vacation. It also means that a normal transportation vehicle can haul it.
Its compromises are (compared to the wing version) that it has less headroom, a moving center board with its maintenance, and somewhat restricted access to the aft berth. The increased headroom may or may not be an issue. Neither offers standing headroom so sitting headroom is the primary issue and both are equally comfortable in that regard. Both offer standing headroom at the galley with the pop-top. My brother in law who is 6’3” has cruised with me almost every summer for two weeks for the last five years and has no problem with the height in the water ballast. So, while increased headroom is always welcomed… its just not a deal breaker. Headroom should not be the deciding factor of choosing between the two models.

The centerboard has a retracting system that requires some amount of maintenance and has proved to be mildly annoying with some cable failures. It requires a strong pull to haul the board up unless the mechanics are kept in top condition. The cable and some of its associated hardware will likely require more maintenance in salt water. The centerboard does not carry the liabilities involved with a heavy swing keel.

The after double berth is a pain to access on the water ballast model. In my opinion its best relegated to the agile. The wing version has fold up companionway steps making access much easier. This would be a very serious compromise were it not for the spacious V berth. It has proven to sleep to two adults in fair comfort. It has much better ventilation than the aft berth and easy to access for the agile impaired. There are however some drawbacks in using the V berth as the primary berth. The bedding has to be rolled up and if a surge exists in the anchorage... there will be more movement.

On the plus side, the water ballast is easier to balance the helm as the centerboard offers significant boat trim abilities. The water ballast model has also proven to offer a good ride in rough chop. The water ballast being heavier has less freeboard than the wing.
As to tenderness, there have been mixed messages. Some have felt that the heavier water ballast feels stiffer even though its ballast is not as low. The water ballast has traditionally been restricted to a 110 jib, which does a good job down to light air at which point the 110 is inadequate and the boat enjoys a 155% drifter. The wing version is available in either the 110 or 135. Both boats need reefed fairly early (15-18) and both enjoy a double reef when winds approach the mid 20’s.

Performance seems to go towards the wing model. While it’s likely that a centerboard will outperform the wing going to weather, the lighter wing with less wetted surface gains significant advantage off wind though most comparisons to date have been against differing headsails with the wing using a 135 or 150 against the centerboards 110.

Many things that were initially thought odd about the C250 have been exonerated and appreciated by those who sail her. The open transom and swim ladder are fantastic... making the boat very easy to get back aboard from the water or road surface if traveling with the water ballast model as no portable ladder is needed. The motor well has solved the problem of a difficult reach to motor controls and the problems of a lifting mount. The lack of bulkheads in the cabin has been appreciated as it makes the interior spacious and livable. The lack of sidedecks hasn't turned out to be the detriment once thought that it would be...mounting the coach roof isn't a problem with the well designed mid stanchions. What was purported to be light rigging is serving well. That it doesn’t have exterior teak, doesn’t get scoffed at by the squirrels that visit my back yard.

Were there design shortcomings? Sure, and it has seen upgrades of many systems as all new designs do. I’ve never been happy with the swept spreader rig...but have found a work around.

The C250 w/b for me has been a very capable coastal cruiser, which handles the Great Lakes very well and easily makes the trip from Texas yearly. Storing at home has made it a very economical boat. The money saved in slip fees pays for the yearly vacation to the great cruising waters of the North Channel and Georgian Bay.

Others have traveled and cruised with it... Herb and Nancy Payson own one and have shared their accounts of trailer cruises with it in Sail magazine.

The C250 is not for everyone, if salty traditional lines with lots of teak are important… this isn’t the right boat. If a low maintenance, open spacious interior, roomy cockpit, an easy to swim from 25 ft boat with ease of trailering but capable coastal cruising are needed…then this boat is worth your interest. Either model… if trailering often… look at the water ballast… it will make launching and retrieving easy. If mostly slipped or moored… look toward the wing.

Hope this offering answers some of your questions.

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 - arlyn stewart on 06/27/2003 19:50:42

Edited by - on

Wogman
Deckhand

Members Avatar

21 Posts

Response Posted - 06/26/2003 : 17:59:27

Arlyn~
Thanks for all the great information. When it comes to Catalina 250s...
YOU DA MAN!

Paul
C-250WB #83 Sundew
Folsom Lake, CA
"Don't Give Up The Ship"

Edited by - on

rik9393
Deckhand

Members Avatar

4 Posts

Response Posted - 06/26/2003 : 22:49:47

Arlyn

Thank you; thank you

Rik

Edited by - on

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 06/26/2003 : 23:43:09

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> Performance seems to go towards the wing model. While it’s likely that a centerboard will outperform the wing going to weather, the lighter wing with less wetted surface gains significant advantage off wind though most comparisons to date have been against differing headsails with the wing using a 135 or 150 against the centerboards 110.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I have never sailed the C250wb but I had Hunter 19 water ballast before my C250wk. The Hunter19 was a very tender boat with a huge main and a very small headsail. After owning that boat I new my next boat would be a keel. I was raised sailing a fin keel.

At this years nationals my wing keel out preformed the water ballast by a huge margin on all points of sail. The water ballast was an early model the sail number was 86. They had modified the jib tracks to be outboard so the jib would go around the spreaders. I heard 2 different stories about the headsail; some said it was a 150% other said it was recut to a 135%. Whatever size it was, it was obvious the jib being outboard hurt their windward sailing performance. We were able to out point them and all the other boats on the races course. In the 4th race on Saturday we did not get a great start and rounded the windward mark 20 seconds or so behind the water ballast. Now with the wind around 8 to 12 and both of us having at lease a 135% we should of sailed pretty equal. That was not the case we caught them past them and crossed the line 1:04 in front of them.

Listed below is the time behind us the water ballast finished in each of the first 4 races.

Race #1 4:06

Race #2 8:12

Race #3 8:54

Race #4 1:04

I don’t have the finish times for the 5th race but the wind was spotty and between 0-8 so there was a little luck involved if and when you got the wind. We crossed the line around 10 minutes before they did.

I hope people are not reading this as bragging. There has been some talk about how the 2 boats would match up to each other. Since this is the only time I have raced against a C250wb this is the only report I can give.

Bryan Beamer
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3da35b3127cce961d8ff3fd0b0000001010" border=0>
Daylight Again
C250wk #495
2003 National Champion

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 06/27/2003 : 12:17:04

I've done some PHRF racing over the years, and I've seen bathtubs outsail carbon fiber MIT "syndicates" because the guy on the tub was a good sailor and the guy with the $$$ was not......(Straight time, we're not even talking about handicaps here...)

Remember the old Socrates debates?...He'd take one viewpoint on an issue and win the debate. Then he'd switch viewpoint and win the debate again.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that, IMHO, the two boats are, for our intents an purpouses, pretty much equal, regardless of a small theoretical advantage of one over the other. A quarter knot of boat speed over five or so miles can get pissed away in a heart beat in a bad tack or mark rounding. If both are rigged properly the better sailor will win, of course there's also the "luck" factor....

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 06/27/2003 12:20:30

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 06/27/2003 : 18:58:13

Racing combines skill and equipment performance. Yes, on a given day on a scale from 1-10, a skipper and crew can have a 10 outing on a 5 boat and beat a 10 boat with a 4 outing by skipper and crew.

But… the field is not level... the winning skipper won only because he had a very good day and the losing skipper had slightly less than an average day. If they both had average skill days…the 10 boat would win by a good margin.

Most racers want to compete on a level field and many prefer one design racing. I’ve done both… and liked one design and disliked an adjusted field… enough so that I don’t participate in it. It is fraught with politics, grumbling, excuses, etc. Those who can out politic, out grumble and out excuse the next person... do ok with it, and for some… those things are seen as part of the racing field itself. I neither have those skills or am inclined to be around others who have them… so I chose a long time ago… not to race other than if one design opportunity presented itself.

My second wife (who was a monster)… often told me that my first wife (who was a sweetheart) ruined me because I knew the difference between the two. I know I’m not alone. I ran into the Commodore of our old Hobie Fleet a few years ago… and asking what he was sailing he replied, “a C22 because it’s the only one design sailing in our area.”

Where am I heading? To my mail box… which had an offering this week from someone making the comment that the wing and the centerboard are simply not equal. And, he was right. He observed, “The water line is about 6+ inches below the bottom stripe.”

Remembering my old Hobie racing days, in light air… everyone was checking out the competitions crew… the reason was simple, extra weight is drag.

Performance = Power – (minus) Drag.

Performance goes up if power increases
Performance goes up if drag decreases

Parts of this are simple... differing headsails and drag levels don’t allow a level playing field. The sail is pretty easy to see and the association has a Chief Measurer to ensure compliance… but the drag level with differing keels is not easily measured. Without doubt, the six inches of water line difference plays a major effect, as every sailor knows that increased whetted surface means increased drag.

I guess Oscar, I have to join with Bryan and the person who wrote to me this week saying, “It also seems clear that absolutely no comparisons can be made between WB's and WK's.”

Just as the C25 tall rig and the standard rig don’t provide a level field and have two distinct classes, I would suggest that different classes be provided for future Nationals for the wing and centerboard 250’s. While they may be rated… some historical precedent of why ratings weren’t used for the C25 tall and standard should be investigated and come to play into a decision. For that matter, if ratings for differing C250’s continue to be used… perhaps all boats should be rated and the C25 tall rig and standard rig classes dropped. However, as I tried to point out earlier, racing is much more fun one design and on a level playing field.

Also, one of the problems with ratings is the variance of numbers. From those offered prior to the Nationals, a set could be chosen to favor either boat. Which set favoring which boat was used this year?

btw... one argument that is often given for ratings is that there aren't enough boats. I'm thinking of the advertisement for sails seen in the Mainsheet that said, Buy the sails used by a Nationals winner and shows a nice pic and identifies a certain C25 tall rig... what it doesn't say, is that boat was uncontested, the only tall rig there.

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 - arlyn stewart on 06/27/2003 19:51:11

Edited by - on

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 06/30/2003 : 04:32:18

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Also, one of the problems with ratings is the variance of numbers. From those offered prior to the Nationals, a set could be chosen to favor either boat. Which set favoring which boat was used this year? <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

This never came into play. I was told Friday before the race that the wk had to give the wb 6-seconds per mile.

Arlyn what are your thoughts on moving the jib trac outboard to get around the spreaders with a bigger headsail? I have not heard of any one doing this until now
.

Bryan Beamer
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3da35b3127cce961d8ff3fd0b0000001010" border=0>
Daylight Again
C250wk #495
2003 National Champion

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 06/30/2003 : 07:47:32

Doing so greatly second guesses the design concepts of the boat. But, I'm as guilty of doing this than any one else. Those kinds of grass roots changes can go either way, good or bad.

What I suspect however about the concept of radical raked spreaders and the modified B&R rig used on the C250 is that one of its goals was to do away with the forward lowers so that the jib tracks could be brought in off the rail for a closer slot.

Years ago on Hobie cats...we used to say... "I got the slot working". Which described a condition of greater power than is normally produced by the sum of the two sails. Prior to the cats, it was believed that an overlapping jib was a necessity for it. The slot theory as then envisioned was debunked. What emerged was a concept that the two sails could find a place where they seemed as one large efficient sail... and this was the cause of the super power mode...which is a very real experience and will drive the boat beyond the limits of each sail pulling independently.

What was felt needed to produce this was a more inboard sheeting of the headsail. Many boats experimented with and ended up using barber haulers to pull the sheet inboard from the rail. Newer designs therefore followed this revelation and moved the tracks inboard. To accomplish it, the forward lowers had to go which was accomplished with raked spreaders which also got the spreaders back out of the way of a more modest jib at some cost to downwind problems with the main. Primarily the raked spreaders were necessary to hold the middle of the mast forward with no forward lowers. Some boats (larger than 25 footers) went to an inner forestay.

My thinking is that the goal of running a larger headsail may have not have yielded much net gain and in fact could incurr a loss. When cruising Pensacola, Fla during a winter vacation a couple of years ago, Mark Melchoir also had his C250 w/b there. We left Pensacola channel heading west in the Gulf to Predidio Cut and with light winds just under the limits of my drifter around 4-6 mph I decided to take some advantage on Mark and fly the 155% drifter on the close reach. It was about 10 miles... and I gained ever so slightly on Mark but when winds increased to the point the drifter had to come down, I normally set and haul in the lee of the main so turned off long enough to douse which was all the time necessary for Mark to get ahead.

If winds would have been 3-5, then I'd likely gained more by its use. Because it overlaps the spreaders, it can't be sheeted hard having to be sheeted just off the spreader and of course it sheets to the rail.

I am a believer in the inboard tracks and the concept of getting the sails to perform as one on a weather course... And, my best experience at it was had on a crossing of Lake Huron. We had the boat moving at 7.3 knots for several hours. One period with a locked helm and not one bit of attention to the boat lasted two hours. And, the 110 jib was reduced by two turns of reef. A video segment of that is on my web site.

http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/c250_3.WMV

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 - arlyn stewart on 06/30/2003 07:50:58

Edited by - arlyn stewart on 06/30/2003 11:14:23

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 06/30/2003 : 11:33:10

Bryan, I just watched that video segment again... and noted something that you have commented on... which I had remembered running some but not that much. If you look carefully it can be noted that I was running a cunningham... and that it was honked tight enough to induce a lot of wrinkling in the shelf. There were also some wrinkles in the jib.

While wrinkles normally are undesirable... its hard to complain about 7.3 knots sustained punching into the not heavy but significant chop. I've never duplicated that kind of speed going to weather... I may have to rethink the use of a cunningham.

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

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3321 Posts

Response Posted - 06/30/2003 : 18:12:41

Arlyn - I've followed your comments and explanations on the C250 with much interest. You have explained a lot that puzzled me!
You are definitely the "Bill Holcomb" of the C250! <img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
Derek

<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3dc30b3127cce942c608d6f1e0000001010" border=0>
TRFK#2262"This Side Up"

Edited by - on

willy
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
422 Posts

Response Posted - 06/30/2003 : 21:03:59

Rik,
Boy did you open a can of worms! I can add just one thing that nobody mentioned....draft! The 20" draft on the 250WB was what pointed me toward the boat in the first place. I sail in a shallow eastern salt water bay and every year the sailors on my dock return each evening to compare notes on what new sandbars the noreasters have churned up over the winter. I have an 03 (hull#655) and can tell you the boat performs extremely well. Many of the issues folks found with the earlier models have been engineered out of the boat.
I love it!
Bill

Edgy
Rehoboth Bay, DE

Edited by - on

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 07/01/2003 : 12:22:18

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> Arlyn You are definitely the "Bill Holcomb" of the C250!<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

This is true. I’ve learned a lot about the c250 from Arlyn.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I may have to rethink the use of a Cunningham. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I am a strong believer in the Cunningham; it is so much easier and faster to adjust the luff tension with the 3 to 1 Cunningham than to use the 1 to 1 halyard.

Bryan Beamer
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3da35b3127cce961d8ff3fd0b0000001010" border=0>
Daylight Again
C250wk #495
2003 National Champion

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 07/02/2003 : 19:34:18

Bryan, your right, it is faster and easier and perhaps more... a cunningham has the effect of pulling the draft of the sail forward slightly. The results of that are a sail with greater lift when air is flowing over it faster.

During another lifetime, I sailed and raced Hobie Cats. My young son and I had a blast. It wasn't long before the competitive spirit prevailed and I bought a tuning book by Phil Berman. He described every system on the Hobie 18 and what to do to tune it for max performance. One key system was the battens which were adjustable. The draft of the sail could be tuned by adjusting the tension on the battens. Further, the draft point of the sail could be adjusted by sanding the batten strips to cause them to bow where desired.

Needless to say, the stock battens were all uniform shape causing the draft percentage to be too far aft. I spent a whole weekend tuning those batten strips by sanding the sides to move the percentage of draft forward.

Prior, the five or six Hobie 18s that I competed with were about matched for speed... after, we had a speed edge that helped me to win more than my share or races. Racers are pretty well in tune with things... the Commodore very shortly after that tuning, asked me what I had done to gain a distinct edge.

If I were to get serious about racing a c250... I would tune the batten strips by sanding for a thinner section at about 1/3 the distance aft. I'd likely also make extenders for the strips so that they could be tensioned for light air days. In light air, tensioning can increase the pocket and power. I ran mine tight enough in light air, that when tacking the boom had to be grabbed and thrust across to get the battens to pop to the other side. In very heavy air, no tension was given to the strips.

How much difference do these things make? Enough to give the edge over the person not using them.

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.