Association Forum - C25 Ocean Handling: Fixed vs Swing 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 25 Specific Forum

C25 Ocean Handling: Fixed vs Swing Keel

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 2

mobile homeless
1st Mate

Members Avatar

25 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 02:43:07

Despite the near death inducing blow provided by that "bass boat pedestal" line, even if it was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek, I might be taking ye olde C25 for a look and test spin at the end of this week or early next. In other words, members of this forum might be suffering from more questions from this end. My early apologies.

Another quick question: Has anyone ever noticed their C25 listing to the starboard slightly at anchor? Wondering if the motor would cause this but assuming that if under 9.9, this would not be the case. Any other ideas for the slight list. Was thinking it could be the dreaded fiberglass repair syndrome...

kh

Edited by - on

Champipple
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
6855 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 08:12:41

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Another quick question: Has anyone ever noticed their C25 listing to the starboard slightly at anchor? Wondering if the motor would cause this but assuming that if under 9.9, this would not be the case. Any other ideas for the slight list. Was thinking it could be the dreaded fiberglass repair syndrome...

kh
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Depending on the year, (that indicates where the motor would be), a full water tank, an empty head tank or maybe one fat overweight individual (before we had women on this board I coulda said fat overweight broad, but now Cathy would give me hell) sitting in the quarterberth could cause this. Also, High tide and a bad dock line rigging can do so as well.

Duane Wolff
"The Flying Wasp"
C-25, #401 std,sk
Chief Measurer C-25/250 national Org.
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b2dc20b3127cce9cd2f45b211a0000004010" border=0>

Edited by - on

n/a
deleted

Members Avatar

163 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 08:12:44

On some models the double batteries and the 15 gal water tank are on the starboard side as well as the motor. Depending on how the rest of the gear is stowed, this could explain the list.

Edited by - on

tinob
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1883 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 09:21:10

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Despite the near death inducing blow provided by that "bass boat pedestal" line, even if it was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek, I might be taking ye olde C25 for a look and test spin at the end of this week or early next. In other words, members of this forum might be suffering from more questions from this end. My early apologies.

Another quick question: Has anyone ever noticed their C25 listing to the starboard slightly at anchor? Wondering if the motor would cause this but assuming that if under 9.9, this would not be the case. Any other ideas for the slight list.
kh

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Some less than obvious potential offender, wind on the mast, cross currents on the hull and keel, mast out of column etc.
Val on "CALISTA" # 3936 '83 Tall Wing

Val Bisagni

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 10:01:45

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>...Has anyone ever noticed their C25 listing to the starboard slightly at anchor?...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

When my boat starts listing to starboard, I know it's time to replace the portside beer keg! <img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>

Don Lucier, Northstar
C25 SR/FK

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5909 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 13:47:45

Kelly,

I get the impression that what you really want is a boat that is more bluewater-capable than a C-25. Why don't you look around for a used C-27, which is a much beefier boat than the C-25, sails well, looks good, and older ones can be bought at a reasonable price (a little more than a C-25). A few years ago some fellow sailed one around the world, so I guess that qualifies them generally as a bluewater-capable boat. (If you were planning something that serious, you would probably want to upgrade the standing rigging and make some other modifications to strengthen it even more.)

Personally, I don't think storm sailing is something that most of us should do for fun. You only do it when you have no better choice. But, if I were caught out in seriously foul weather, I would certainly prefer to be on a C-27 than a C-25, or any other coastal cruiser.

Steve Milby "Captiva Wind" C-25 T/FK #2554

Edited by - on

Bristle
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
834 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 15:14:42

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
A few years ago some fellow sailed one (C-27)around the world, so I guess that qualifies them generally as a bluewater-capable boat<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>
From what I recall reading about that, it was a heavily modified C-27, and even then I would question it's qualifications as a "blue water cruiser." It's a coastal cruiser that some thrill-seeker took into the blue... But the hull is not built to withstand an impact with a mostly submerged container off a ship, the cabintop and hatches are not engineered for a rollover, the ballast may not be sufficient to right the boat from 180 degrees (especially given the exagerated beam), the post-mounted rudder is highly vulnerable, there's only one forestay, etc., etc. The C-27 is a little beamier and heavier than the C-25, but neither is blue-water capable--even though they may go there in the hands of some nut.

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 SR-FK #5032 "Passage" in CT

Edited by - on

Bristle
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
834 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2002 : 15:34:13

To your starboard list question, Mr. Homeless... The relatively unbeamy C-25 can be affected by the combination of water tank, battery(ies) and engine on the starboard side of the later models. I have only one battery and keep my larger anchor and chain under a port settee, but my new, heavier Honda may leave my mast tilted South a little in the slip this year. That's my fault--not the boat's.

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 SR-FK #5032 "Passage" in CT

Edited by - bristle on 04/25/2002 21:06:28

Edited by - on

mobile homeless
1st Mate

Members Avatar

25 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2002 : 05:45:18

A lot of great answers to the Starboard listing question. One good thing is that there obviously could be many reasons the C25 does list (which this one in question does) to the starboard. I helped a good friend put a toe rail on a 72 Sabre 28 that he had raised from the bottom of the channel from the great March Storm close to 10 years ago. It needed extensive fiberglass work on the starboard and the beast listed when all was said and done. Sure was great in heavy air on a starboard tack though! (NOTE: Never put a custom wood three inch toe rail on a boat without having a lobotomy first....especially in July...especially if your are the freak that is THREADING the stainless below!)

Steve's suggestion concerning the Catalina 27 is interesting. I have often looked at this boat and do remember reading the story about the loon that took the C27 far and wide... I never seem to find this boat in both good condition and for a good price. IT usually seems to be priced for what it's worth, unlike the Catalina 25, where many first time sailors do attempt the jump and get over it thus sometimes leading to far better than average deals. I have looked at those in the past.

As for the sailing in a storm comment, I DO NOT like sailing in a storm and I dont know too many Normals that would enjoy this particularly. I am still having a hard time understanding why my sailing in 18-20knts would be considered "storm sailing" when in these parts, this can happen in clear skies with a Southerly summer air flow. In looking at 98% of the pictures in the graphics section (I downloaded the whole lot), it looks to be below 15 knts in all with most weighing in on smooth water, hence the questions pertaining to "FRESH AIR" sailing, which in NO way implies storm sailing. I believe several posters started to answer my question with storm condition assumptions, something I really wasnt asking. See my original question that started this thread. Perhaps this is considered "stormy" to many. Needless to say, most started to respond as if I was looking to throw myself in a GALE!

After perusing the pictures, I came upon only one which illustrated the C25 in a bit of air, this by far my favorite picture of the lot. It's the boat "Razor's Edge."
<center>
<img src="http://home.earthlink.net/~ktholsten/temp/razor_drop.jpg" border=0>
</center>
Still, the swell/chop conditions here are about as perfect as you can get considering. So you see why I might have inquired about this. That being said, I did get some good answers.

This site really does need an overall review/analysis of the Catalina 25's sailing characteristics in different conditions that is located on one or two pages. This forum, however, is a good source as well but searching the archives does not always bring the desired answers.

As for my needs, a fixed keel C25 would obviously be the best for coastal work in fresh air conditions with a bit of swell running. Of course, gunkholing in the Pamlico Sound and coastal fingers gets more problematic. So there are advantages to a 2ft or so draft besides trailering. Alas, the boat I am looking into IS INDEED a FIXED entity if not a fixed keel... But the price might be hard to beat and the circumstances might just cause me to modifiy my habits.

I hope to take a look Sunday or early next week.

kh

ps - No one did answer this earlier question: Can the swing keel be locked in the "down" position to keep it from banging in more challenging conditions? Has anyone done this in said conditions?

Edited by - mobile homeless on 04/26/2002 06:07:14

Edited by - on

Bristle
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
834 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2002 : 09:35:33

Mobile... I can't answer the keel lock question (I doubt that it can be done safely with a 1500 lever against whatever you rig), but I suggest you get in direct contact with Val Bisagni, who sails on the Great South Bay of Long Island (shallow like Pamlico) and I suspect ventures out into the big pond. Val had a swing keel, and was the first among this group (that I know of) to retrofit the wing. He should be able to tell you about comparative performance and characteristics of both better than anyone, but I'll warn you, he's not a fan of swingers in salt water.

Bear in mind that the swing fully deployed draws a foot more than the fin, while the wing draws only 2" more than the fully raised swing. Given the satisfaction I've read from the guys who converted, I'd say that suggests that the wing is PERFECT for you--even if it takes a little more looking and costs a little more. I think Val had his conversion done by a yard--if so, he can elaborate on the cost. Maybe that would be another route for you--if that swinger is really a good hull, deck, and rig. It'll improve resale somewhat, too.

If it sounds like a plan, you could buy the swinger and sail it this year with the idea of converting later. Just be sure to have the trunk, cable, pin, crank, and attachments inspected carefully as part of your survey (??). (I'm another proponent of surveys--for a few boat units, you learn a ton about your prospective baby.)

Best of luck,

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 SR-FK #5032 "Passage" in CT

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3323 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2002 : 10:15:56

I think that "Razor's Edge" should ease his traveler...
Derek

Edited by - on

mobile homeless
1st Mate

Members Avatar

25 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2002 : 11:45:40

Heh... I think he should "ease" just about everything considering the apparent direction of the wind! Still, made for a exciting photo...

kh

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5909 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2002 : 12:45:57

Kelly,

I don't recommend that you sail a C-27 around the world, although the fellow who did so proved that the C-27 is a very solidly built boat. In fact, I suggested that most people ought to avoid sailing any small boat offshore in heavy weather. I'm just suggesting that a C-27 is better suited for your intended use than a C-25. It will give you more of a safety margin, in the event you intentionally or unintentionally find yourself offshore in heavy weather, and it is a boat that is probably still within an affordable range for you if you look around and are patient.

The C-27 has 2700 lbs. ballast, and displaces 6850 lbs. That means it has one pound of ballast for every 2.5 pounds of its displacement. The C-25 has 1900 lbs. ballast and displaces 4550 lbs. It has one pound of ballast for every 2.4 pounds of its displacement. The ballast-to-displacement ratio is approximately the same for both boats, and it is pretty close to what you will find on most sailing yachts of comparable size. A Moody 54 ($625,000.) has 14,960 lbs. ballast and displaces 44,132 lbs. That's only about one pound of ballast for every three pounds of displacement (which is proportionately less ballast than a C-27).

The C-27 has a beam of 8'-10". The C-25 has a beam of 8'-0". (If not for state highway trailering limitations, the C-25 would probably have been designed with a broader beam.) The C-27's beam is not, by any means, unusually broad. It is about the same as you will find on any 27' boat of its vintage. More modern monohulls are now being designed much beamier than the C-27, to give them more interior space, and they still have ample self-righting ability. For example, the Hunter 320 is only 4½ feet longer than the C-27, and yet it has a 10'-10" beam, which is a full 2 feet wider than the C-27. With a relatively narrow beam and substantial ballast, the C-27 will recover quickly from a rollover.

With the possible exception of a steel hulled yacht, I can't think of any yacht of any size or construction that could withstand hitting a submerged container from a ship (and I'm not sure that even a steel hulled yacht would survive a hard, direct hit). No yacht manufacturer has found a solution to the submerged container problem, except to carry the best life raft money can buy.

A post-mounted rudder is not as sturdy as a skeg or keel mounted rudder, but it is more sturdy than a transom-hung rudder. Even so, it is not unusual to see a post-mounted rudder on a bluewater boat. They are very strong and offer other advantages. The Farr Pilot House 50 ($706,000.) has a post-mounted rudder.

One headstay is enough to support a mast, if the cable is thick enough, but it would not be difficult to add a second one to a C-27, if one were planning on sailing over the horizon.

I've read the books written by most of the small boat voyagers, and it is unfair to regard them as nuts and thrill-seekers. They planned their voyages scrupulously, and prepared their boats for every conceivable contingency. I also read the account of the C-27 circumnavigation, and don't remember any details, but do recall that he was equally well-prepared for the trip.

Ask the experts who sell and repair boats at your local marinas for their opinions of the comparative merits of a C-25 and a C-27 for coastal cruising. My C-25 is ideal for my purposes, but, if you ever make an error in judgment in the area where you will be sailing, a C-27 will be more forgiving.

Steve Milby "Captiva Wind" C-25 T/FK #2554

Edited by - on

Bristle
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
834 Posts

Response Posted - 04/27/2002 : 18:33:24

I stand corrected on the C-27's beam... I was thinking of the C-270, which is quite a bit beamier. My definition of "off-shore" is not just out in the ocean, as Homeless apparently wants to go--it's over the horizon where there's no help or shelter. A blue water boat is designed for that, including things like water-tight hatches, heavy-duty ports, and Kevlar-reinforced bows (in the newer ones). I'll stand by my opinion that the C-27 is not a blue water boat, and that somebody who treats it as such has a different perspective on the value of life than I do. But I won't dispute that it's a little more suitable than the C-25 for coastal cruising where there's a chance of getting caught in a little more than you planned for.

Dave Bristle, 1985 C-25 SR-FK #5032 "Passage" in CT

Edited by - on

mobile homeless
1st Mate

Members Avatar

25 Posts

Response Posted - 04/28/2002 : 03:07:09

Well, I have never been as much a fan of wing keel boats as fin keel for performance and handling purposes but for holding power, stability, and shoal work, there really isnt much that can beat a well-designed wing keel. Dave's suggestion here as well as the Val Bisagni reference are points well taken. If I do opt for this swing keel at a deal, I will surely be in contact with Val.

As for the C27, as said in my other post, I have thought of them in the past but they have never quite been in my price range unless in a condition I dont find too appealing, especially at square one. The points concerning its advantage in certain design areas are well noted. When comparing the two, however, it is amazing what the little 25 DOES offer especially when you factor in price. I have read a few comparison posts in this forum.

I hope to get some shots of the boat in question which I might throw up on a page.

kh

Edited by - on

f_sondergaard
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
92 Posts

Response Posted - 04/28/2002 : 07:49:26

kh, I don't know if you have purchased yet or not but, while in Southport earlier this week I saw a 27 Catalina on a trailor for $7,000. Its at Foster's store on W West St., there is also a 25 on Oak Island , a 1977 -$4000. The 1977 was in the Southport pilot newspaper.

Edited by - on

MattL
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
990 Posts

Response Posted - 04/29/2002 : 03:00:40

I was listing to a couple of guys at the lake talking about weight positioning the other day. One, who has a "Windrose", said that a privious owner three time ago put 60 lbs of cement in the bow and it is still there. The other said must work because I always follow him in the races

Matt
EC Rider
Cat 25 86'
FK SR

Edited by - on

mobile homeless
1st Mate

Members Avatar

25 Posts

Response Posted - 04/29/2002 : 16:08:21

I was wondering.... my brother's kid is about 60 lbs.... hmmm

kh

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.