Association Forum - HULL NUMBER TO MODEL YEAR

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 25 Specific Forum

HULL NUMBER TO MODEL YEAR

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Previous Page | Next Page

Author

Topic

Page: of 4

Doug G.
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
49 Posts

Response Posted - 12/08/2003 : 18:22:29

Larry,
Good Project.

Pelican is a 1983 swing keel, Std. rig, Trad. interior, Separate fuel locker, outboard on starboard,porta potty, and is Hull # 3767, quite close to Old Salt's #3744.

Edited by - on

Randall
Navigator

Members Avatar

123 Posts

Response Posted - 12/08/2003 : 21:07:40

Larry,

My 79 TR/SK (hull 1459) has the fore and aft dinette, not the L-shape. The engine is on the port side and has a marelon-type thru-hull in the transom to feed the fuel line straight through from the lazarette gas can shelf.

I didn't know some boats didn't have sinks in the head, but mine is going to become one of them. Those things are useless.

Thanks for your selfless endevours,

Randall

Edited by - on

Spain
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
35 Posts

Response Posted - 12/08/2003 : 23:13:25

Larry,
"MARGARITA" is a 1978 SR/FK with the "L shaped dinette. The Hull Number is 0931. It has the fuel tank on a shelf in the port locker and the battery and water tank is under the starboard seat.

Lee Spain

Edited by - on

allencl
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
143 Posts

Response Posted - 12/09/2003 : 11:09:19

#5644 1987 Standard rig, wing keel, traditional interior- matches your description of Mark III.

Edited by - on

Gary B.
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
969 Posts

Response Posted - 12/09/2003 : 12:21:14

Encore! is a Mark 1, a '78 #685, L-shaped interior.

What distinguishes my boat is that she is about the only one I have ever seen with double lifelines. She came with NO cockpit coaming boxes (but I am finally retro-fitting them this winter), and she has simple plywood, not teak hatch boards.

She also has a great option of four drawers and a shelf in the area across from the head that is often a large bin on many boats.

For a time I owned #496, which is now called Suede Shoes. She lives in Olympia, WA, owned by Bill Sloane. She's a '78 dinette.

Gary B.
Encore! #685 SK/SR
Vice Commodore

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/09/2003 : 13:51:02

Larry, I commend your effort and admire your dedication, but I take exception with many of your comments in your buying guide. I appreciate the IMHOs in it but it still makes some erroneous statements and some very opinionated conclusions. I would recommend that the board of officers collectively draft a document (that does not have as many personal opinions) to be placed on this web site as the official position of the Association. I would hope that document would provide positive reasons and explanations for all of the variations and allow the reader to identify those positive attributes that matter to them and find the boat that most closely meets those criteria. As an example;

The fixed keel boats generally have slightly better performance than the wing keel or swing keel, and can point a few degrees closer to the wind, but they sit so high on the trailer that they're much more difficult to rig and ramp launch. I do not see a correlation between height off the ground and difficulty rigging a boat. You either do it on the trailer and the height makes no difference or you do it in the water. Rigging in the water is the preferred method because the deck is approximately at dock height. It is true that full keels are more difficult to ramp launch but it should be mentioned that they are very easy to launch with a hoist. Full keel boats are also safer to trailer because you can see behind them in your rear view mirror.)

The pivot pin is 1-1/2" diameter bronze, much softer than the iron keel, so it erodes with time and repeated raising/lowering cycles. The bronze pin is very hard and perfect for its application. Those who have had to deal with an elongated hole in their keel will attest to the hardness of the pin. The pin is supposed to wear first but does not always do it without wearing the cast iron as well.

The outboard is supposed to be mounted on the STARBOARD side of the transom. This is wrong, please clarify that the “Mark l” boats had them on port and they are where they were intended to be, they were moved to the starboard side as a design change, people with Mark l boats should leave their motors where they are unless there is a major trim issue they are trying to cure. If you see a C-25 with the outboard mounted on the PORT side, some previous owner goofed.

I strongly recommend you avoid boats that do not have the pop-top, stern pulpit, and/or lifelines installed. Whoa, a non pop-top is a very valued boat; they provide much more room for walking and mounting hardware. They are much preferred for racing boats and a non pop-top boat has much better rigging options open to it.. The pop-top is the least utilized nautical invention I know of, it is rare to see a popped top, thay are usually never used after the first few trys. Just look at all of the unused pop-top tents! Lack of these items will make the boat difficult to re-sell,

. The 1986 and newer wing keel boats are really the cream of the crop, Remember that the Mark lV boats were stripped of most of their teak and the new decks had genoa tracks that make sheeting difficult when you are not close hauled. IMHO the Mark lll with upgrades is the best boat. 

I am sure your new rev would reflect many changes but I reiterate that this is too important a document to be one man’s opinion. If I had a fixed keel, tall rig, 1987 without a pop-top I would own what in my opinion is the very best configuration and your document would reduce my boat’s value several thousand dollars if not make it un-sellable altogether. Please let’s turn this over to our officers and produce a new informative document that explains all of the advantages of the various configurations and simply explains the differences that are not significant.

Edited by - on

Captain B
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
88 Posts

Response Posted - 12/09/2003 : 14:16:32

Hull #4854 is a 1985. Interesting to note that "Anteres" hull #4849 is alleged to be a 1986. What's up with that?

Edited by - on

lcharlot
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Antigua and Barbuda
1301 Posts

Response Posted - 12/09/2003 : 19:12:30

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> it but it still makes some erroneous statements
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You are quite right. I wrote that article more than 5 years ago, and have since discovered or been pointed out to several errors, which I have corrected in the original copy of the article, but the webmaster has not yet posted the corrections, it looks like.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
I do not see a correlation between height off the ground and difficulty rigging a boat. You either do it on the trailer and the
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

This statement is really more to do with the relative difficulty between rigging the Catalina 25 and the Catalina 22, which sits low enough on the trailer that most standing rigging adjustments can be done while standing on the ground (at least if you're 6' tall). These same adjustments to the Catalina 25 require a stepladder, which adds to the setup time and the inconvienience of repeatedly moving the ladder around. The swing and wing keel 25's can be worked on with an 8' stepladder, which fits in the back of a full-size pickup, whereas the fin keel 25 pretty much requires you to own and carry a 10' or 12' step ladder, which does not fit in the back of a pickup.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
height makes no difference or you do it in the water. Rigging in the water is the preferred method because the deck is approximately at
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I would never attempt to do a mast-raising evolution on a Catalina 25 in the water, except in an emergency. Too much risk of the mast getting out of control and falling on an unstable rocking boat, not to mention loss of rigging pins dropped overboard.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
launch but it should be mentioned that they are very easy to launch with a hoist.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

If you always keep your boat at the same marina, and it has a travel lift, I agree. Launching from a travel lift also keeps your trailer out of salt water (assuming you are on the coast). But, of all the places I have trailered my boats, no more than 1/4 of them had lifts or even hoists (The Catalina 25 exceeds the rated capacity of most small-craft davit hoists I have seen, anyway). One disadvantage of lifts is that they are only available during normal business hours, whereas most ramps are self-service, 24/7.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
keel, so it erodes with time and repeated raising/lowering cycles.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Frank is right on here; I goofed. I have since heard from several sources, including Catalina Direct, that keel failures involving the pin are almost always due to the hole in the cast iron rusting and eroding through the top, not the pin itself wearing through.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
The outboard is supposed to be mounted on the STARBOARD side of the transom. [red]This is wrong, please clarify that the “Mark l” boats had them on port and they are where they were intended to be, they
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I'll stick to my guns here. My Mark I, hull 1205, came to me with the outboard mounted portside, and the balance was so bad that even with the water tank full and all possible gear weight moved to the starboard side storage lockers, the boat listed 5 degrees to port sitting at the dock, and sailed much stiffer on port tack than on starboard. Even after I moved the motor to the starboard side of the transom and added a second size 27 battery on the starboard side, the boat STILL listed noticeably to port, although the sailing performance on starboard tack improved somewhat. My new boat, #5857, has the motor mount on starboard, and lists 3 degrees to port sitting at the dock, and this boat, with the traditional style interior, doesn't have the portside weight bias of the dinette models! All Catalina 25's seem to be heavy on the port side, and it's my firm opinion that all should have the motor mounted on starboard.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
I strongly recommend you avoid boats that do not have the pop-top, stern pulpit, and/or lifelines installed. [red]Whoa, a non pop-top is a very valued boat; they provide much more room for walking and
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

This is almost a non-issue. There were only a very few non-pop-top boats built; I have only counted 5 or 6 that I have seen or been told about. But Frank is correct that these are sought after by racers.
As for the lifelines, I had to add the whole kit myself on #1205; installing the stanchions and stern pulpit was a nightmare. It took two of us three full weekends to do the job, and there were some places where it was simply impossible to access the underside of the deck, and I had to use lagscrews instead of through bolts with nuts and washers. Pulpits and stanchions are installed at the factory before the deck is joined to the hull, when you can still easily access the underside of the deck.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
their teak and the new decks had genoa tracks that make sheeting difficult when you are not close hauled. IMHO the Mark lll with upgrades is the best boat.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Frank makes a good point. The inside genoa tracks on the Mk. IV do cause the sheets to rub against the lifelines on a reach or run. I guess the factory was trying to appease criticisms of the boats' pointing ability. I think the issue is overblown anyway. Hard core racers and performance freaks didn't buy Catalina 25's, they bought Capri 25's. We had a Capri 25 in our club, and I can atate that it ran rings around the Catalina 25's and could usually beat a Catalina 270, especially in light-air conditions.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Please let’s turn this over to our officers and produce a new informative document that explains all of the advantages of the various configurations and simply explains the differences that are not significant.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I agree. We have enough active C-25 owners on this forum, representing the whole range of C-25 styles built. Perhaps we should invite anyone who cares to, to contribute to an article - what they like or don't like about their boats.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/09/2003 : 20:33:31

Larry,
I like your style.
Frank

Edited by - on

Gary B.
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
969 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 00:06:54

For whatever it's worth. my old '78 Mark 1 has a heavy Yamaha 9.9 on the Port Side (L shaped traditional interior). Even though my friend's similar boat (with fold up table) with port OB leans heavily to port, mine simply does NOT, and, no, I cannot tell you why. I have a 2 battery bank starboard, but not a ton else, except cruising stuff stored in the quarterberth. When I just pulled her for winter, I was astonished to see that the scum line from the water showed that she actually sits a tad lower on the STARBOARD side. Go figure!

I am not changing my engine to the starboard side.

BTW: when cruising in the San Juans, I carry 12 gallons of gas in the old port locker and she still stands up pretty straight. Could the interiors have anything to do with why some lean to port and others don't?????

Gary B.
Encore! #685 SK/SR
Vice Commodore

Edited by - on

lcharlot
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Antigua and Barbuda
1301 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 08:27:55

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary B.
 Even though my friend's similar boat (with fold up table) with port OB leans heavily to port, mine simply does NOT, Could the interiors have anything to do with why some lean to port and others don't?????

Gary B.
Encore! #685 SK/SR
Vice Commodore
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I have heard of a couple of C-25's that don't seem to have the weight imbalance problem. These boats are both Mk. IV's with the inboard diesel, and being Mk. IV's they are not Dinette interior. Gary is lucky to have a Mk. I that sits upright, but how his boat escaped when so many other Mk. I's have a heavy list to port...? I always assumed it is brcause of the weight bias of the cabin interior (galley, bulkheads, dinette table) which are installed to port of centerline. The starboard side mounting of the water tank and battery isn't enough to compensate, except for Gary's boat, I guess.

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 08:47:09

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">For whatever it's worth. my old '78 Mark 1 has a heavy Yamaha 9.9 on the Port Side (L shaped traditional interior). Even though my friend's similar boat (with fold up table) with port OB leans heavily to port, mine simply does NOT, and, no, I cannot tell you why.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My boat has a port mounted outboard (and no, it wasn't mistakenly mounted) and it, too, does NOT list to port. An 80 lb object(my Merc 2 stroke) mounted a foot or two off the centerline isn't going to drastically affect the balance on a 5,000 lb boat!

Edited by - on

John Mason
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
687 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 14:48:06

There has got to be something else causing the list to port problem. I have an '82 starboard mount outboard, two batteries in the starboard battery compartment, traditional interior, the port lazarette sometimes full/sometimes empty, starboard water tank s full/s empty and my boat has no list to either side, never does.

Larry, you even said you changed the mount to starboard and added a battery to starboard and it still listed to port. That kinda removes the outboard as a source of the problem.

Oh yeah, the useful info - '82, hull #3290, fixed keel (cast iron, mild steel bolts), standard rig, outboard, traditional interior, pop-top, external fuel locker, split backstay, useless shallow locker on the starboard seat, stainless spreader mounts, short bow stem (now upgraded), and bow lights in the hull (the eyes).

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 15:21:22

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I am interested in what hull numbers were built in each Mark (version) of the boat. If anyone has information that contradicts or revises the "Mark" descriptions above, please let me know. – Larry Charlot<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">”Larry, I commend your effort and admire your dedication, but I take exception with many of your comments in your buying guide. I appreciate the IMHOs in it but it still makes some erroneous statements and some very opinionated conclusions. I would recommend that the board of officers collectively draft a document (that does not have as many personal opinions) to be placed on this web site as the official position of the Association. I would hope that document would provide positive reasons and explanations for all of the variations and allow the reader to identify those positive attributes that matter to them and find the boat that most closely meets those criteria.” – Frank Hopper<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> “We have enough active C-25 owners on this forum, representing the whole range of C-25 styles built. Perhaps we should invite anyone who cares to, to contribute to an article...” – Larry Charlot<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Okay, here goes…

Like Frank, I commend Larry for his voluntary effort in documenting the history of the C25, it has educated me quite a bit and to that I say, “thank you”. As Frank suggested, I too would like to see a document that is less opinionated, but I don’t think the C25/C250 National Association should have an “official” position regarding the proposed “MK” numbers.

I’m probably going to get some flack for this, but I still haven't warmed up to the idea of using "MK" numbers to delineate the factory running changes made to the design of the C25.

Yes, yes…I know these “MK” numbers are just a means to call out the differences in design over the years, but officially sanctioning these "MK" numbers doesn't seem quite right to me, mainly because these MK #'s are not designated nor recognized by Catalina Yachts (and Frank Butler) for the C25, like they are for the C22, C28,…etc. If a group of owners want to get together and call their boats a “MK I” this or “MK X” that,…is one thing, but I believe the C25/C250 National Association should only officially recognize and perpetuate what is officially recognized by the designers and builders of our boats. I'm sure just as many improvements were done to the C22 over the years as were done to the C25, but there are still just two factory designated models, the C22 and C22 MK II.

Another reason I'm not fond of inventing "MK" numbers for the C25 is that the only people who are or will be aware of these "MK" numbers are those that frequent this website. I'm sure the vast majority of C25 owners (6,500 C25's built) have never been to this site or are even members of this organization (membership 500-600?). This means that most current and former C25 owners will be oblivious to these "MK" designations. As for prospective buyers, I believe they will only confuse them because from observations on this forum even seasoned C25 owners are somewhat confused as to what “MK” is what. Additionally, what happens when the prospective buyer calls a seller/broker/Catalina dealer armed with these MK numbers and asks, “Is that C25 a MK III?" I’m sure they will be greeted with a collective, “Huh?”.

Lastly, when referenced in the forum and in the articles, these “MK” designations are usually not too flattering to earlier C25’s. It appears that anytime a “MK” number is used on the forum, it is usually in response to a prospective buyers query, and the answers generally come out to, “the MK IV is the holy grail” and/or “beware of the MK I”. This is fine if you happen to own a so called “MK IV”, but to castigate my so called “MK I” devalues my boat and turns potential buyers away from me.

If owners want to refer to their boats by a MK number that’s fine(I got dibs on MK XXX

), but for the reasons stated, I think the C25/C250 National Association should not “officially” recognize and perpetuate these “MK” numbers.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 16:15:39

Don,
So where are you on the whole project if we blow off the Mark thing? Do you feel a document explaining the various features and their percieved benefits would help prospective owners decide what to look for? I think it would be a nice document to add to the documentation area. However, had I read such a document I would probably have passed on my boat and possibly gotten something other than a Catalina 25 for lack of finding exactly what I would want, that would have been a shame. I am delighted to be a part of this august body.

Edited by - on

Gary B.
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
969 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 21:43:49

"Larry,
I like your style.
Frank"

Me too! However, I think Don has made some great points about the whole "Mark-whatever" designation. I have used it in the last week, but it felt kind of funny. Now I think he articulated why.....

Gary B.
Encore! #685 SK/SR
Commodore of Vice

Edited by - on

Sea Trac
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Vanuatu
1357 Posts

Response Posted - 12/10/2003 : 23:28:18

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Captain B
 Hull #4854 is a 1985. Interesting to note that "Anteres" hull #4849 is alleged to be a 1986. What's up with that?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Hi Bryan,

The factory informed me that #4849 is a 1986 model built in October 1985; must be Detroit envy. Anyway, I now consider Antares to be a 1985, period.

Regards,

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 12/11/2003 : 22:50:42

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by fhopper@mac.com
 Don,
...Do you feel a document explaining the various features and their percieved benefits would help prospective owners decide what to look for? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes, I do think a document like this would be helpful to prospective buyers, so long as this document lists, like you stated, the various features and percieved benefits and NOT just a list of percieved problems!

Edited by - dlucier on 12/11/2003 22:53:31

Sea Trac
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Vanuatu
1357 Posts

Response Posted - 12/11/2003 : 23:29:36

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by fhopper@mac.com
 However, had I read such a document I would probably have passed on my boat and possibly gotten something other than a Catalina 25 for lack of finding exactly what I would want, that would have been a shame. I am delighted to be a part of this august body.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Don't most boat buyers either decide to buy a boat, look at every thing for sale, and buy the best fit/value or have a unique buying opportunity present itself (i.e., a special boat or "the" boat)?

For the record, this is now officially a December body.

Henry "Hank" Rearden
FKA J.B. Manley

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 12/12/2003 : 00:02:51

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by lcharlot
 I have heard of a couple of C-25's that don't seem to have the weight imbalance problem. These boats are both Mk. IV's with the inboard diesel, and being Mk. IV's they are not Dinette interior. Gary is lucky to have a Mk. I that sits upright, but how his boat escaped when so many other Mk. I's have a heavy list to port...?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

This is one of the reasons I'm not too crazy about grouping C25's into MK numbers...it makes it too easy to make statements like this.

BTW, as I stated earlier, my 81' C25 doesn't list and the 1978 C25 SR/SK that was two slips away from me last season also didn't list.

Edited by - dlucier on 12/12/2003 00:09:07

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/12/2003 : 08:10:43

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Antares
 <blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by fhopper@mac.com
 I am delighted to be a part of this august body.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

For the record, this is now officially a December body.

Henry "Hank" Rearden
FKA J.B. Manley
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That would be the difference between wise and senile,

•ƒ®ß•
FKA fhopper@mac.com

Edited by - on

Sea Trac
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Vanuatu
1357 Posts

Response Posted - 12/12/2003 : 10:59:33

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by fhopper@mac.com
 That would be the difference between wise and senile<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Grounded (you) and ungrounded (me). Considering how singularly human it is, self-pity really is an ugly thing. Many times this forum's comraderie acts as a much needed soothing balm for many of us, and the natural desire to unburden one's self overcomes one's better judgement. Please accept my sincere apologies.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/12/2003 : 11:45:32

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">[i]Originally posted by Antares
Please accept my sincere apologies.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Huh? For what? I figured if we are wise in the August of our years (The source of the "august group"?) we must surely be senile in the December of our years... attempt at humor in reply to your humor.
I do not know the reason for your apology but you should know I enjoy your posts and look forward to your name in the active topics. What is the deal with the Henry “Hank” Reardon? Surely not an Ayn Rand reference, I know it's winter but we don't need to get THAT depressed! I was going for a Prince kinda deal but the forum won’t take all of the characters that a Mac can generate.

Edited by - Frank Hopper on 12/12/2003 11:51:05

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 12/12/2003 : 11:59:19

Avoiding all the controversy ---- # 5050 "Even Chance" is a 1985 TR/SK dinette, starboard engine mount, port fuel locket, stainless spreader brackets, open turnbuckles, rode slot, portapotti, and no list.

Brooke

Edited by - Brooke Willson on 12/12/2003 12:00:23

steephen
Navigator

Members Avatar

100 Posts

Response Posted - 12/17/2003 : 21:01:01

Larry:

I guess "Little Wing" is a Mark 1. 1980 swing keel; port gas storage; 28' mast; hull # 1667. Cast keel.

Stephen Z

Edited by - on

Page: of 4

Topic

Previous Page | Next Page

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.