Association Forum - installing a longer boom

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

installing a longer boom

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 2

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Member Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Initially Posted - 12/02/2003 : 17:45:53

This is probably a Bill Holcomb question, but others of you may know the answer. I understand the geometry of the C25 boom length on a standard rig, but I've begun to wonder why Catalina used the same boom length on the tall rig. The relatively shorter boom creates a much more acute mainsheet angle, with the result that installing an effective bimini (my Sisyphean quest) becomes even more difficult, and getting clotheslined by the sheet on tacks and gybes is de rigeur.

Has anyone installed a longer boom -- a C27 boom would add a foot -- and perhaps even bent on a mainsail of corresponding dimensions? To do so would, of course, increase the size and power of the main, but probably not remarkably so. Yes, I know this would violate class rules, about which I care not.

What's the history here? And/or, what do you brilliant and tasteful colleagues think?

Brooke

Edited by - Brooke Willson on 12/02/2003 17:46:53

OJ
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4382 Posts

Response Posted - 12/02/2003 : 17:58:08

For what it's worth - a friend and I installed internal outhauls in our booms together one day . . . we had them side by side and my 1981 boom was a good 10 inches longer than his 1986. You may want to note the "excess" boom length below.

Edited by - OJ on 12/02/2003 18:00:16

PZell
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
548 Posts

Response Posted - 12/02/2003 : 18:05:02

I believe that many of the booms on the C25 are the same
ones as on the C27. That was done to save money in production
I expect. Hence the extra unused portion.

Edited by - on

Leon Sisson
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1893 Posts

Response Posted - 12/02/2003 : 20:23:26

Brooke,

A word of caution. Keep in mind when considering extending a boom, that doing so brings it closer to the backstay. If you always keep some tension on your vang, that may not be a problem. However, if you combine a long boom, no vang, and maybe a reefed sail to raise a sliding gooseneck up a bit, you could end up snagging the boom on the backstay during a jibe. That could turn out far more exciting than you planned.

-- Leon Sisson

Edited by - on

frankr
Captain

Members Avatar

256 Posts

Response Posted - 12/02/2003 : 21:13:27

There are some theories that specify that the combined centers of the sail area should be over the center of the keel for handling reasons (wind cocking and weather cocking). That why on small cat boats (mainsail only) the mast is very close to the bow so that the center board isn't in the cockpit area. I can't find the link that describes this right now. Extending the boom would tend to move the center of sail area aftward. Of course I can't figure how a furling jib or genoa doesn't effect this center also. I have noticed that sometimes cranking the genoa in or out will balance the tiller.

Edited by - on

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 04:34:06

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">A word of caution. Keep in mind when considering extending a boom, that doing so brings it closer to the backstay.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's exactly the point -- to bring the boom end closer to the backstay so the mainsheet more closely parallels the stay, thereby providing more room in the cockpit. Of course the boom has to be able to safely clear the stay, but it doesn't have to clear it by the approximately three feet it does now. Yes, I do have a vang, and when I reef, I drop the head of the sail, not raise the boom (which would potentially slide the gooseneck out of the mast kerf).

My 1985 boom is definitely shorter than the E dimensions of a C27. OJ, your boat looks like a standard rig.

Brooke

Edited by - Brooke Willson on 12/03/2003 04:38:01

Jared
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
70 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 07:27:12

This is kind of unrelated, but then again kind of related. I just noticed in that picture above the nice 90 degree angle between the mast and the boom. On my tall rig, the boom hangs way down into the cockpit at a much shallower angle. Is that just the consequence of owning a tall rig, a streched leech on the mainsail, or the gooseneck being attached on the mast too high (though the luff is tight). I am new to this sort of thing, so I really have no idea.

Let us know if the C27 boom works and I may just switch one out with a C27 when noone is looking in the marina one night.

Edited by - on

matsche
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
280 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 07:52:51

Jared:

It's your sail. I had the same problem on my tall rig until I bought a new Ullman main. Now I've got the pretty 90 degree angle too!

Edited by - on

Bill Holcomb
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
769 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 10:53:55

Hi Brooke,

The reason that the boom on both the tall rig as well as the standard rig are the same is simply a matter of standardization and cost. No one at the factory would make a mistake and get the wrong boom on a boat shipping out to a dealer. You know, the old interchangeable parts idea.

You are correct that a longer boom on our tall rig boats would have several advantages.......not to mention more efficient mechanical advantages.

I'm not positive, but it seems to me that the boom on the C27 is a different extrusion. I do remember that just the extrusion (sans ends and other gear) for the C27 was about 25% more expensive than the boom on a C25. It's tough to conceive of the extra length making that much pricing difference.

As far as having a new mainsail cut that utilizes the extra boom length: this would certainly move the center of effort for the sail plan aft. The effect would be to add to weather helm and severe rounding up if you didn't reef early.

With roller furling jibs, two potentially negative effects can be noticed regarding weather helm. First, as the jib is furled, the sail plan's center of effort tends to move aft.....again, contributing to the boat rounding up more quickly. AND, as the jib is furled, it's center of effort rises higher above deck. So, the whole sail plan's center of effort rises - increasing the angle of heel with each gust. Of course, this means that the effect of form rounding up is amplified as well. The two work against the skipper's efforts to steer a straight course. These effects are why I've said persistently that it works best on Snickerdoodle to tuck in reefs in the mainsail before reducing jib sail size. If the wind pipes up, and I'm being affected by weather helm, I always tuck a flattening reef or a first full reef in the mainsail. The helm becomes neutral as soon as the reef is in.

Bill Holcomb - C25 Snickerdoodle #4839

Edited by - on

Gary B.
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
969 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 12:12:58

Bill: In last season's Six Pac race on the Columbia, I was leading my PHRF fleet through most of leg 1 (long beat down river/up wind) when the wind rose to about 15 knots true. I was overpowered and tucked in a reef on my new main (standard rig). Soon after, I was passed by a Ranger 24 whose skipper kept a full main and simply was luff driving. The next day, I had a reefed main and smaller headsail because it was blowing about 20 knots true and we were on another beat. We got creamed until the wind died enough to pull out the reef and get the 153 up. Then, we passed the entire fleet and handily won the leg. My epiphany at the time was that my boat would simply not point with a reef in. I was too busy to really notice my pointing angles at the time, but that's all I could figure when thinking about it later. Any thoughts on this?

Gary B.
Encore! #685 SK/SR

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 13:46:47

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gary B.
 I was overpowered and tucked in a reef on my new main (standard rig). Soon after, I was passed by a Ranger 24 whose skipper kept a full main and simply was luff driving. Gary B.
Encore! #685 SK/SR
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
When I am over powered I usually leave the main full harden everything and pinch.

Edited by - on

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 13:51:04

Bill, I'm pretty sure you're right about the C27 having a different extrusion -- it's designed to have a thicker bottom than sides, so it can handle the mid-boom sheeting. At least that's how it appears on the Catalina Direct website.

Since I have a hanked-on jib, it's a given that I tuck a reef in the main first. That comes for me at about 15 knots wind, depending on how much rail meat/crew assistance I have in the boat. If I'm singlehanding, the reef comes early, so I don't have to work so hard. If I have my 22 year old son, we take more risks. If my wife is on board, too, then we reef early, since she begins to whimper past 12 degrees heel.

A friend suggested to me that with all the damaged boats in the mid-atlantic after Isabel, someone might be selling boat parts pretty cheap. I may look for a C27 boom: I don't want to pay $ 700 for a new one and then it turn out to be a stupid idea.

On the other hand, I may just need to learn to be grateful for the wonderful boat I have, even if a truly useful bimini is problematic.

Brooke

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 14:10:45

Go here, they make the original extrusions that Catalina used. You can buy the extrusion and reuse your parts. It is cheap.
http://www.lefiell.com

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 16:05:37

Brooke: If the bimini is your big priority, how about raising your boom by shortening the main--even a foot might do wonders. Or, you could add reef points that would let you optionally raise the boom by a small amount. It sounds like your boom is short enough that you wouldn't have a problem during a jibe--even if the boom flipped up (a goosewing), but you could easily check that.

I recall somebody saying that a particular Ranger main had the same luff but a longer foot--I don't recall whether that was in comparison to a standard or tall rig. But it would seem, as Bill says, that it would only detract from your handling by increasing weather helm. With a longer foot, the roach should probably be smaller to minimize contact with the backstay.

It would seem that at the normal height, the tall rig should have a longer boom for a better sheeting angle as well as a safer cockpit. I always assumed those were the reasons for the extra length on our '85 SR boom. I wouldn't want it any shorter.

Edited by - on

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 16:33:20

I agree, Dave, about raising the boom as the easiest solution. The plan is to replace my 19 year old mainsail next spring, and high on the option list is to pay the extra money to have one custom made. Jim Scott, of Scott Sails, owns the marina where "Even Chance" sleeps, and even though a custom main would be more expensive than a stock sail, it would be cheaper than buying a sail and a new boom.

I've also long thought about relocating the traveler to the forward end of the cockpit -- I've contributed to a number of posts on that subject and there's no need to rehearse all that here. What's clear is that when St. Frank of Butler, blessed be his name, designed the C25TR, he didn't plan for it to carry a bimini. Installing one requires compromises, and I'm just trying to figure out which I can live with and which I can't.

I plan to play with the geometry this winter. I'll keep the gang posted with my experiments.

Brooke

Edited by - Brooke Willson on 12/03/2003 16:34:51

Sea Trac
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Vanuatu
1357 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 16:49:47

This may sound flip, but that's not how it's meant...how about lowering the cockpit sole, since the space underneath is not usable anyway?

Edited by - on

Leon Sisson
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1893 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 18:11:44

Antares,

Re: "...how about lowering the cockpit sole,..."

That wouild introduce a high risk of the cockpit sole pooling water when beating in heavy air. I used to sail on a Hunter 27 that was designed with the cockpit sole about 2" too low. On a fast beat, when the stern wave got high, the leeward scupper would back flow, soaking sheets and feets in saltwater. That sucked so bad that one of the helmsperson's duties was to block the offending scupper with their heal. There were a lot of things not to like about that boat. Wet feet and soggy sheets were sure among them.

-- Leon Sisson

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 18:27:42

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Antares
 how about lowering the cockpit sole,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I think his goal is to change the sheeting angle of the mainsheet. He needs to change the angle of incidence from the end of the boom to the horse. Raising the boom would do that, lowering the sole would not.

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 19:49:17

In JB's defense, you could probably lower the sole the better part of a foot without getting wet... On the other hand, you are kidding, JB--right??

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3321 Posts

Response Posted - 12/03/2003 : 21:28:18

Dave - I think it's a variation on "if you can't raise the bridge, lower the water"!!

Derek

Edited by - on

lcharlot
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Antigua and Barbuda
1301 Posts

Response Posted - 12/04/2003 : 08:25:19

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Dave Bristle
 Brooke: If the bimini is your big priority, how about raising your boom by shortening the main-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

One of the small problems with raising the boom on the C-25TR is that you then have to cut a new slot for the sail slugs, as the OEM slot is only a couple inches above the gooseneck. I have heard somewhere that the the C-25TR mast is actually the same extrusion and even the same part number, as the C-27 mast. Can anyone confirm this?

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5904 Posts

Response Posted - 12/04/2003 : 10:01:57

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have heard somewhere that the the C-25TR mast is actually the same extrusion and even the same part number, as the C-27 mast. Can anyone confirm this?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
This is a hard rumor to quash. Somebody started this rumor in the past and people hear it and repeat it because it sounds plausible, but, the last time it came up, I looked at the masts of older and newer models of standard rig and tall rig C-27s, and compared them with standard and tall rig C-25s, and they aren't even close. The C-27 mast is much beefier than any version of C-25 mast.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">One of the small problems with raising the boom on the C-25TR is that you then have to cut a new slot for the sail slugs, as the OEM slot is only a couple inches above the gooseneck.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Not so. Mast gates allow you to raise the boom to any height you wish. If you put a one-foot flattening reef in your mainsail, and then raise the sail to the top of the mast, the boom of a tall rig boat will hang at about the same height above the cockpit as the boom of a standard rig boat, and a Bimini top will fit. Although the area of the mainsail will be reduced, it will still be about the same as the area of a standard rig mainsail, so you'll still get good performance.

Edited by - on

Brooke Willson
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
983 Posts

Response Posted - 12/04/2003 : 10:31:49

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">One of the small problems with raising the boom on the C-25TR is that you then have to cut a new slot for the sail slugs, as the OEM slot is only a couple inches above the gooseneck.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Even if the boom were raised above the slot, all this is only an issue when bending on the mainsail or taking it off. My sail stays on the spar all season. You would bend on the sail, raise the gooseneck above the slot, and lock it in place with a stopper.

As for lowering the sole . . . you MUST be kidding. In fact, I use the space below the cockpit sole for stowing extra cushions. That's also where you access the gudgeon and lower (at least on my boat) motor mount nuts.

Brooke

Edited by - on

Jared
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
70 Posts

Response Posted - 12/04/2003 : 11:24:07

Is the sheeting angle on yours so bad on a run that the sheet "bends" over the lifelines? I noticed this a couple of weekends ago in a pathetic attempt to try to get wing-on-wing. That can't make for optimal performance. I am wondering on a tall rig if it is normal to be that hard of a sheeting angle or if my sail leach is way too stretched out. Could the flattening reef that you are referring to help solve my hanging boom problem by only having to add a grommet to the sail a foot or so up the leach?

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5904 Posts

Response Posted - 12/04/2003 : 12:08:03

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Is the sheeting angle on yours so bad on a run that the sheet "bends" over the lifelines? I noticed this a couple of weekends ago in a pathetic attempt to try to get wing-on-wing. That can't make for optimal performance.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
When you're wing and wing, the mainsheet normally droops across the lifelines, but I've never noticed that to be a problem. The only place you could mount the mainsheet traveler to avoid that would be on the coach roof. In ultra light air, it helps to use a much smaller, lighter weight mainsheet.

If you're trying to sail wing and wing in very light air, you need a whisker pole to hold the jib out. In moderate to stronger wind, the wind itself will hold the sail out fairly well.

It's not too difficult to sail wing and wing without a pole in moderate to strong wind, but you need to keep your head down, especially in a tall rig boat, and watch carefully for any windshifts, to avoid an unexpected gybe.

To maximize the amount of sail area, Catalina made the mast on a tall rig boat two feet higher than a standard rig mast, and made the boom on a tall rig boat hang one foot lower over the cockpit than the boom on a standard rig boat. I am accustomed to the low boom, and it doesn't bother me. If you are accustomed to a higher boom, it might be an annoyance to you, or even feel unsafe. If your sail already has a cunningham cringle about one foot above the boom, and you have a sailmaker add a flattening reef cringle to the leech of your sail, about one foot above the boom, then, when the reef is tucked in, and your sail is raised to the top of the mast, your boom will hang at about the same height over the cockpit as a standard rig boom. You really don't need the cunningham cringle, but it gives you a little flexibility that I like having. If you don't have the cunningham cringle, you just release the mainsheet, pull the end of the boom up to the higher leech cringle, and then re-tension the mainsheet. The end of the boom will be raised much higher.

Edited by - Steve Milby on 12/04/2003 12:33:04

Sea Trac
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Vanuatu
1357 Posts

Response Posted - 12/04/2003 : 13:09:39

Uh, no, I wasn't kidding. And, I was only thinking about the bimini problem, not the main sheet problem. However, I hadn't thought about Leon's point. Nor concerned with the multitude of possible objections (e.g., difficulty, loss of storage, etc.), since where there's a will...

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.