Association Forum - Investigating the C250 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

Catalina 250 Specific Forum

Investigating the C250 WK

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 2

Steve leBlanc
Deckhand

Member Avatar

USA
21 Posts

Initially Posted - 10/25/2003 : 17:46:29

Sorry, I posted this in the C25 group accidently;

Last week my wife and I went to the Long Beach Boat show and the comadore, wife, really liked the Catalina 250 WK modle. In fact she liked it much better than our Mac M25. She even stated that she would feel safe going to Catalina in it. This is a BIG plus for me.

So here are the questions:
1) I do not have much confidence in the water ballast system, safety and handeling wise. How safe is this system and how well does the boat handle?
2) The model I was looking at was the wing keel version. The brochure states the wing keel is 3 feet, so I figure I would need 4 feet of water just to get it to float off the trailer. Does anyone out there have a wing keel model and do they ramp launch it? If so, how difficult is it?

Thank you all in advance
Steve L.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 18:10:05

See... http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/trailercruiser.html

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 20:22:00

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Steve leBlanc
 Sorry, I posted this in the C25 group accidently;

Last week my wife and I went to the Long Beach Boat show and the comadore, wife, really liked the Catalina 250 WK modle. In fact she liked it much better than our Mac M25. She even stated that she would feel safe going to Catalina in it. This is a BIG plus for me.

So here are the questions:
1) I do not have much confidence in the water ballast system, safety and handeling wise. How safe is this system and how well does the boat handle?
2) The model I was looking at was the wing keel version. The brochure states the wing keel is 3 feet, so I figure I would need 4 feet of water just to get it to float off the trailer. Does anyone out there have a wing keel model and do they ramp launch it? If so, how difficult is it?

Thank you all in advance
Steve L.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> Keep asking for someone with a wing to respond, I think the comment about tow vehicles is the best argument for the WB over wing. You do know the water that goes in the ballast is what ever water you sail in. There are stories of horrible odors from WBs that are not trailered regularly so that their ballast tanks get drained and dried. Organic soup in a closed dark hot container can do some scary things. I know as a lake sailor that pulls once a year regularly and might occationally go to a regional lake I would only consider the Wing.

Edited by - on

Steve leBlanc
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
21 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 22:39:47

I heard of someone buying a 26 Mac from the scouts seabase, on the MAC email user group. The boat must have sat for quite awhile with water in the tanks. The tanks would not drain due to growth (I can only visualize what it must have looked like) Someone recommended pouring bleach in the tanks and letting it sit for a bit. That was done and the tanks did drain after awhile. The smell and color was not too pretty.

Edited by - on

Steve leBlanc
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
21 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 22:43:28

Just to let all know, my towing will only be 10 miles at the most, so the weight of the boat and trailer with a wing keel should not be too much of a problem. I have a F150, V8 with a tow package, 3.88 in the rear end. 7000 pound tow capability. The truck may huff and puff going up the ramp, but it shoiuld not be to bad.

Edited by - on

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 23:10:40

I have a wing keel and I would not trade it for a water ballast EVER.
I have not sailed a C250 wb but I owned a 1995 Hunter 19 wb before my C250wk. I did not like it period! It was very tender and the cabin always had a smell to it. I found the smell was coming from the ballast tank.

In my experience the wk will out perform the wb on all points of sail. It tracks better and it is not as tender. You will hear from people that say the wk is very tender. That is very far from the truth. I have experienced sailors that can back up my statement.

I grew up around the C25 from the beginning 1977 to the late 80’s I always liked the 25 but in IMHO the C250 is head and shoulders above the c25 for comfort. I have 2 kids and a wife that spend time on the boat with me and we have enough room for all.

As for towing, our boat is in the water year round so we don’t pull it out much. I have pulled this boat to Indiana it was a 3000 mile round trip. My tow vehicle was a F250 4x4 diesel crew cab. The lake we sail in is built for water storage so the water level can go up and down 30 to 40 feet a year. Because of this our launch ramps are long and a gradual. We have a 30’ tow strap and a wheel that is installed on the tongue for launching. It is a 2-person operation if your launch ramp has finger docks that you can launch next to. If no finger docks it is a 3-person job.

In my opinion you can trailer launch a wk at any ramp that is deep enough. I did have some problem retrieving in Lake Wawasee in Indiana. That lake is natural and the level does not fluctuate very much. Their ramps are short and very steep. With the stock trailer that comes with the C250wk I think that ramp is hardest to retrieve on.

As for weight my boat loaded for sailing and on the trailer weights in at 6255lbs. It could be towed with a ½ ton pickup truck with a tow package or any full size SUV. My first tow vehicle was a 1998 Ford Expedition that had a 5.4-liter engine and a towing capacity of 8000lbs.

Final thought a well-balanced C250wk is the nicest boat in it class to sail and to spend the weekend on. The extra 15 minutes it takes to launch the wk is well worth it. If you are into racing it will hold it own with other cruiser/racers of similar size.

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 23:46:12

Boy oh boy....

After Bryan's diatribe I have to weigh in in defense of the water ballast.

In one year since new I've trailered 3000plus miles. I've launched and retrieved at a hand full of different ramps. I know that on at least one of them I was able to retrieve only after blowing the ballast tank. I also greatly appreciate not having to haul around the extra weight. I know from experience that leaving a comfort zone between actual and max towing weigt makes a big difference in ride quality and in wear and tear on the vehicle.
The tank has had water in it for up to ten days at a time, after which it was allowed to drain and dry. There is no evidence of odor whatsoever.
As far as stability is concerned, I have been out in 40+ gusts on the Chesapeake,with waves tall enough to make the horizon dissapear.The motion of the boat was most comfortable,and reminded me more of the C30 I used to own than the J22 I used to rent. Moving around on deck in a seaway is very doable.I think the 250 is a stable boat in general, and I don't think the water ballast performs less than the wing in that respect.
The only handling issue currently on the table is that in very demanding conditions, ie very windy and very wavy on certain points of sail and under certain loading conditions the current itteration of the rudder appears to be lacking somewhat. We are working with Catalina on a solution, and as the rudder comes off in seconds making changes is easy.
So,IMHO, both are great boats, and both have subtle pro's and cons. Given that I was going to trailersail, I opted for the WB for maximum trailring comfort and flexibility. do not regret doing so.

Oscar, no pic, in Atlanta making BU's

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3324 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 23:51:04

Bryan - with all due respect to a National Champion, I do not understand your claim that the C250wk is not a tender boat. I have sailed with Steve Steakley on his wk and we had to shorten sail in 10 knots wind! (In fact I had to teach him how to do a controlled round up so we could win...) Also, I have sailed "This Side Up" alongside Steve (who had less sail up than I did) and we both were hit by a small gust (maybe 8 - 10 knots max) - TSU barely heeled yet I was looking at the bottom of Steve's hull. Admittedly, "Moon Chaser" is the only C250 of which I have knowledge. Maybe some other owners will chime in with their experience - I'd be interested at what wind speed they have to reef the main or jib.
Derek

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 10/25/2003 : 23:52:48

Sorry about all the typo's, I'm typing on a remte keyboardlooking at a TV in a hotel room and there is no way to edit...

Edited by - on

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 08:27:39

Derek,

My dad who has been sailing for some 30 years and has a Chrysler 26 with a fin keel spent his racing career beating the paints off of any c25, J24 or any other boat that would race in the club races sailed with me at the nationals. I told him the reports of some people that think the c250wk is tender. After racing Saturday he stated the MY c250wk was not tinder at all. I was talking with Steve Milby on the dinner cruise after the 4 races on Saturday. In the 3rd race the wind was stronger than any of the other races. Steve and I were talking about that race and he mentioned in the short time that the wind was around 16 knots that he was a little over powered. We never felt over powered. Grant it he had bigger sails than we had. Here is a picture with Steve and my boat in the same wind. Notice that my crew and me are on the leeward side and Steve and one crewmember is on the windward side. The heel angle is close to the same.

We can carry a full 135 and main in winds up to 15 knots and still have a comfortable ride. When the wind gets above that we are reefing or shrinking the jib. A couple of weekend ago we were sailing in winds around 25 knots it was not a race we were just cruising. I had a double reefed main and around 90% head sail never heeled over 25 degrees. There was a c25 out the same day he had a 110 and a reefed main it looked to me he was fight it and the rail was continuously in the water. I ‘m not saying the c250wk is as stable as a c25 because it is not the hull designs are totally different.

You know as well as I do that rig tuning makes a huge difference in the performance of a boat. The balance of my boat works well for me and is not tender. If you are ever in the Colorado Springs area I invite you to come sail with me and you can judge for yourself if MY c250wk is tender

Oscar,

I was stating my opinion on the wing keel. I do agree that the wk and the wb are the best boats available in their class. I did not intend to knock the water ballast. I was just saying for me the wk is the best fit and the extra time it takes to launch the wk is well worth the effort for me. Sorry if I offended any of the wb owners.

Edited by - Bryan Beamer on 10/26/2003 11:32:41

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 09:15:03

Bryan, you did not offend me. Like most other skippers on this forum I think I can handle someone who thinks their boat is the best...

However, you mention rig tuning and its importance. Considering your race results you seem to have a handle on it.

Would you be willing to share your technique? I've read the owners manual, but think I'm not doing as much as I could/should. Maybe we can spin a tech tip here..

Oscar, still in Atlanta.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 09:56:42

Going to weigh in a bit here... literally. The centerboard and wing keel are two different boats in the same hull. One is a trailer sailer, the other is much more the counterpart of the C25.

Its a stretch to apply the dislikes of the Hunter 19 to a C250. Its also a stretch to infer that the c250 centerboard suffers odor problems. Its also a stretch to suggest that a 15 minutes is all the compromise needed to prefer a wing keel over the center board model for a trailer sailor.

But, we know Bryan and appreciate his enthusiasm for his boat and understand... and he is quite right, the wing is a good boat and because of that, I and everyone else have encouraged it as the best choice for a slipped or moored boat. It is not designed specifically to ease trailering and would likely fall into the category of the older C25 fin and wing versions.... trailerable... but not friendly to it. The water ballast design is very friendly to trailering... and ought to be as it was designed specifically for it.

Now, performance. The single most significant factor to performance is likely the SD ratio. The WK has the same identical number as the older C25 wk, 16.29. The older tall rig fin keel is 15.4 . The center board c250 is a whopping 19.32.

Gosh, the wing should bury its bow in the water if it allowed a centerboard boat to beat it with those number differences.

Edited by - Arlyn Stewart on 10/26/2003 09:59:09

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 10:51:35

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Its a stretch to apply the dislikes of the Hunter 19 to a C250. Its also a stretch to infer that the c250 centerboard suffers odor problems<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I agree. I was only saying that it is the only water ballast experience I have.
I think both the C250 wk &wb is a much better boat than any of the Hunter models.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Its also a stretch to suggest that a 15 minutes is all the compromise needed to prefer a wing keel over the center board model for a trailer sailor.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It may be a stretch but here was my logic. Both boats will take about the same time to step the mast and install the rudder. If you use an extension that takes I'm guessing about 5 minutes to set up and a couple minutes to take down after launch.

Our technique, We back to the waters edge block the tires, unhook from the tow vehicle, install the launch wheel on the tongue, hook the tow strap to the trailer and tow vehicle, pull out the slack, remove the tire chocks, and back it into the water. The boat comes off the trailer with about 8’ of the trap still on the hard. We tie the boat to the dock, pull the trailer out of the water chalk the tires, undo the tow strap, hook back to the tow vehicle, and remove the launch wheel go park the trailer. This June I remembered to time the launching procedure from the time we were at the waters edge until we were parked in the parking lot and it took 23 minutes. If you subtract the 7 min to install the wb's extension that is 16 minutes longer to launch the wing.

As for driving down the road I can’t comment on how the wb trailers but I can say my wk trailers extremely well.

Now would I like to do this procedure every time I go sailing, No, but to pull it out and go to another sailing venue once a year I have no problem doing that.

Oscar,

I can say this I tuned my rig to the manual, sailed it and threw that part of the manual in the trash. Then I did my own. I personally feel the way my wk’s rig is tuned may not work for a wb with the outward chain plates. The spreaders on the wb are longer and the chain plates are farther aft. I know Arlyn and I don’t agree on this but a backstay adjuster is a big benefit when sailing in heavier air. Also I have the luff on my furling headsail as tight as I can get it. I also use a Cunningham on the main.

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3324 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 11:23:35

Bryan - this is a very interesting (and in some ways, puzzling) discussion. The picture of you and Steve M. side by side was instructive - but puzzling, because it contradicts the pic I have of Steve S. and myself in the same situation...Maybe you & Steve Steakley should discuss any differences in how you tune your rig! I hope to sail on Bren Peterson's C250wb on Tuesday so, hopefully, I'll have a little more experience for comparison.
Derek

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 11:36:29

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> If you subtract the 7 min to install the wb's extension that is 16 minutes longer to launch the wing.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Excuse me, I believe you have beaten the WB, don't forget their ballast fill time! And I supose that those who have the WB so that they can use a lighter tow vehicle may even need to drain before they haul. In fact I question whether the bunks are adequate for supporting the boat on the hard while it drains. Has anyone noticed any hull distortion while the ballast tank is full and on the trailer?

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 18:32:34

Frank,

Here is some perspective about the difference between these two models. Examining the cruising logs of the C250's to distant locations, there is:

Water Ballast

* My haul from Texas to Florida
* Mark Melchoir's haul from Texas to Florida
* Herb and Nancy Payson's 1st western lakes tour as narrated in Sail Magazine
* Herb and Nancy Payson's 2nd western lakes tour as narrated in Sail Magazine
* Oscar's haul from Pa to Fl
* Oscar's haul to Chesepeak
* Oscar's haul to Chesepeak
* Doug's haul from Ca to San Juans
* Davis Northnagel's hauls from Oregon to San Juans
* Bob Bumala's hauls all over Ca.
* Dietmar Glognar's hauls from Austria to other Europe locations
* My 1st haul from Texas to the Great Lakes
* My 2nd haul from Texas to the Great Lakes
* My 3rd haul from Texas to the Great Lakes
* My 1st haul from Texas to Canada
* My 4th haul from Texas to the Great Lakes
* My 5t haul from Texas to the Great Lakes

Wing Keel

* Bryan's haul from Colorado to Indiana
* Ben's haul from Jax, Fl to south Florida

Please add the ones I've missed to either list.

Edited by - on

bear
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
909 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 19:49:03

Frank,
I never thought to check for hull distortion while setting on the trailer with full ballast
tanks. Only did it the first year I owned Brandy, Bunks are still holding good. Since then I have dumped the ballast while tied up at the dock and filled the tanks while tied up at the dock. I never heard of anyone trailering with full ballast in a C250 WB. I thought that was one of the reasons for having a WB boat, to get rid of excess weight.
Does it really matter once the WK and WB are in the water. It's time to sail. IT's going to be a long long winter. "Bear" on the hard in upstate N.Y.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 20:39:45

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by bear
 Frank,
I never heard of anyone trailering with full ballast in a C250 WB.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I am sure no one ever has, I was wondering about while people were draining after hauling. I assume most people do not have the equipment to blow in the water.

Anyway I believe Steve now has excellent comments from owners of both 250 models to help him make up his mind. And Steve, I would prefer the wing but hey that is just me. You can clearly see you cannot go wrong with either.

Arlyn, didn't mean to tweak your nose but it certainly provided impetuous to make your point very well, and you did.

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 21:48:10

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I know Arlyn and I don’t agree on this but a backstay adjuster is a big benefit when sailing in heavier air. Also I have the luff on my furling headsail as tight as I can get it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Here is my position about a backstay tensioner. I use one on my c250... but I don't recommend them. Here is why.

The purposes of a backstay tensioner is to firm up the forestay (flattening the jib) and reduce pocket in the mainsail by bending the center of the mast forward. They are very effective at doing this on a rig that allows their use. This would be a boat like the C22 or C25 that use forward lower shrouds or a fractional rig. The design of the C250 however eliminates the forward lowers by using radical raked spreaders. These spreaders serve several purposes... including exerting forward pressure on the center of the mast which is important because there are no forward lowers. To exert this pressure the upper shrouds must remain tight. If the masthead is hauled aft by a backstay tensioner, forward force of the spreaders is lost and the mast is free to reverse bend which contributes to a fuller main, while the jib is firmed up. It is a trade, a flatter jib for a fuller main. No advantage is realized by its use with a full main.

However, if the main is double reefed, the reverse bend has little effect and the benefit on the headsail is quite significant . My experience then is that a hardened backstay tensioner on a double reefed main and full jib is good to reduce heel by 5 degrees because it depowers the headsail. But, this is only true on a loose rig.

My hesitancy to recommend it is because to use it, the rig has to be run loose and loose generally means more heel and reduction of heel holds a priority for this boat. No racer however, wants to endure light air without an ability to power up the sails... If racing, loose is a must in light air and having a backstay tensioner allows compensating if the wind freshens. But again, it is only much benefit with a double reefed main.

I run loose as much because of setup ease compared to having light air power and thus need the ability to firm up... but to do that, I also run a baby stay which allows the backstay tensioner to be used effectively with full main. It holds the center of the mast forward when hardening the backstay tensioner. I doubt many would want the inconvenience of a baby stay which has to be released to tack the headsail.

Edited by - on

frog0911
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1349 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 22:14:50

Steve, we are the proud owners of a 2004 C250WK. We do not trailer the boat since we have access to the Ditch from our backyard dock in Florida. The reason we purchased the wing is the General, having been on both boats, was unhappy with the headroom in the WB version. As you can tell from the responses most WK people do not trailer on a regular bases like the WB people. The only person I know who has launch a 2004WK recently is Danny Nichols. I think he is in BVI right now and the reason he has not responed. The one thing that all the responses tell you is no matter which type of C250 you decide on, you will love it and have many hours of pleasure in it like the rest of us in this association.
One other item you mention the WK draft was 3 feet in the brochure, in fact it is 41" (3'5") so a little more than 4 feet would be needed for safety when launching the wing.

Edited by - on

Steve leBlanc
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
21 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 22:19:02

Anyway I believe Steve now has excellent comments from owners of both 250 models to help him make up his mind.

Frank,

You are correct about that,

not only from this thread, but all the other threads. So far, it looks like the WK model, unless CAT decides to all the other 7 - 10 inches in the cabin, so that the wike can stand up below. But that would take from the lines on the boat and those Catalina's are very pretty boats in the water, so adding more freeboard would take away from the lines on the boat.

I spent pretty much today looking around at boats from the 24 - 26 foot range that could be placed on a trailer for storage and driven short distances to the ramp for launching. The Catalina's C250 WK seem to have what we are looking for, once you add the extra's, but I have a year of investigation before I purchase.

But as Jerry Cardwell once stated, "Buying a boat is a love affair, if you don't love it, you won't take it out" Until then, I will be reading these threads and asking questions.

Happy Sailing

Edited by - on

Ray Seitz
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
416 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 22:26:05

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Excuse me, I believe you have beaten the WB, don't forget their ballast fill time!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> I have (once the rigging is up) launched had the rudder on (only one pin) and be pulling away from the ramp in five min. or less. I have yet to use the extension while launching and have only just started using the extension for pulling out. The ballast tank can (I have) be filling while you are pulling away from the dock you don't have to sit there and wait. I have yet to notice any odor from the water in the ballast tank. Thats why Catalina says to add bleach.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 23:06:00

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Steve leBlanc
 
so adding more freeboard would take away from the lines on the boat.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Isn't it great to ask a question and get so many answers? There was one comment made that you mentioned in the quote. When I read it I did not understand it, The comment about the wing having more freeboard... Remember I have only looked at these things at a dealer and am not "intimate" with them, But I do not think the wing has more freeboard. The aditional head room in the wing comes from dropping the floor. The wing does not need to reserve the water ballast volume so they drop the floor. I do not think there is any difference in the outer measurements.
I may buy one in a year as well.

Edited by - on

Bryan Beamer
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1038 Posts

Response Posted - 10/26/2003 : 23:22:47

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I do not think the wing has more freeboard. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The wk does have more freeboard.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2003 : 09:01:12

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The wk does have more freeboard.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So Catalina has two separate molds? I would never have thought that. Or does the WK simply ride higher in the water? How much more freeboard? It sounds like the WK is the tall rig

. What is the deal with the stays being in different locations? What necessitated that? And one more thing if you don't mind... does the short genoa track limit sail options?

Edited by - on

bren737
Captain

Members Avatar

291 Posts

Response Posted - 10/27/2003 : 09:55:50

Frank,

As per a conversation I had with Dave at Catalina when this topic came up last year, Catalina does indeed have two different molds for the WK and WB hulls. They do share a common deck mold. The additional headroom inside comes from dropping the floor (due to no ballast tank) AND the additional freeboard.

Sorry I can't find the thread from last year which has more of the specifics (I believe). You might have more luck searching for it than I did.

As for filling/emptying the ballast tank--it's not a factor. I dry slip my boat and as said before, by the time I park my truck and walk back down to the dock, it is filled. When recovering, the tank starts draining the instant it is clear of the water. I drive up the ramp, directly to my "dry slip" and it's done draining within about four-five minutes. I've never had any hint of hull distortion--other than those caused by me in the gelcoat when banging her into the trailer when trying to recover her in strong winds!

Edited by - on

Page: of 2

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.