This Forum is supported by C&C 27 owners like you whose membership in the C&C 27 Association makes possible this Forum and the accompanying site. Thank you, members, for your continuing commitment.
You are not logged in.
Hi Tom,
Here's one more set of measurements for you, from a kevlar #1 I had built a few years ago for Critical Path (I = 37.00', J = 11.75'):
Luff = 36.75' (full hoist on a headfoil - Rod's measurements are close but not quite max!)
Leech = 35.54'
Foot = 18.48'
LP = 17.74'
Clew Height = 2" (this design dimension is the height on the horizontal above the tack)
The sail had an LP of 151% (with the luff tape added it came to 153%, the max without penalty under PHRF-LO when it was built).
The sail had a deep foot skirt and the clew ended up about 15" above the deck sheeted in hard when new.
If you're interested, I'll be designing a new 155% for the Path in the next month or so, and would be happy to add those numbers as well...
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
1976 C&C 27 MkIII #632
Wednesday? WEDNESDAY?? Don't 'cha know some of us race on Wednesdays?!
Sorry I'll miss it. Have a good one!
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
1976 C&C 27 Mk III #632
Interest in Mk V fleet racing has declined at BYC and Lake Simcoe in general over the last two years. One boat sold last year, another this spring, two more currently for sale.
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
C&C 27 Mk III, Hull #632
Hey Larry,
Sent you a note but it got kicked back. Did you change emails? I may be interested in your trailer. You wanna email me at talwolf [at] hotmail [dot] com when you got a minute?
Thanks mate!
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
C&C 27 Mk III #632
Charles:
Harken introduced two new furling systems this year. The Mark IV is an updated version of their popular racing/cruising system, and the Cruising Furler is a value-oriented product with less features. Both are very competitively priced, and the Mark IV, less expensive than the previous model, looks very good. Can’t speak to the reliability of the Cruising Furler since it’s an all-new product. I just did a comparo of Harken, Profurl, Selden, and Schaefer for a performance-oriented installation on a client’s 41’ and the Harken Mk IV’s the recommended unit based on price and features…
A sail loft can retrofit an existing genoa for use with a furler, but it all comes down to your expectations and your allowance on what the best solution is for you. You could go as simple as changing to a bolt rope luff to attach an old sail to the furler (a few hundred bucks) all the way to a new high-tech laminate furling sail complete with UV and foam luff to improve reefing shape ($3000+). All choices to do with furling are going to be tradeoffs of money spent and performance or convenience expected…
FYI, draft stripes are the horizontal lines (usually done in the same colour as sail numbers) on the sail which allow you to view the sail’s draft and camber quickly.
For performance, a sock is a much better (albeit less convenient) choice than UV protection sewn to the leech and foot of the sail. On the other hand, don’t people put furling on for convenience’ sake in the first place?
David:
I hope Ron didn’t tell you “super-long zippers are v. expensive”. Sail lofts buy zipper material in long lengths (100m+) and cut them to length. On the other hand, if he made your sock out of zipper ends lying around the loft and then passed the savings on to you, that’s a different matter, but anyone paying full price for a sock should get one continuous zipper, it’s more convenient and elegant…
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
C&C 27 Mk III #632
disclaimer: the Path came with an original Harken Unit 0 Mark I Unit which we used a bit the first year, then got so frustrated with the performance compromises I took the (non-split) drum off and just use the foil, whether we’re racing, daysailing, or cruising. Haven’t looked back in the 9 years since!
Hi Fred,
Agree with David - had a friend with the identical problem and it turned out to be localized breakdown of the barrier coat only under the cradle pads. He refinished those areas, reworked his cradle pads, and hasn't had a re-occurrence in several years...
I hear there's a decent shipwright at your club - maybe he could be coerced into duty for ya when he's not building carbon wonder-projects!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path
1976 C&C 27 Mk III Hull #632
Thanks to the Class Association Executive and the website admin for considering and publicizing offers such as this one. I’m all for potential bulk purchases and discount pricing made available to Class Association members, but wish to add a few thoughts about sail purchases in general and this offer in particular…
I’d suggest that the single most important factor in choosing a new sail is not price, reputation, performance, quality, or location, but rather who you’re buying it from. If you establish a healthy relationship with almost any loft or it’s representative, then the other factors will align themselves to match your specific needs.
Yes, there are variables in pricing, but sail purchase choices made on a cost-only basis are no different from any consumer product – you get what you pay for!
Which brings us to the offer from Tack Sails…
The special prices aren’t much different from the regular “Pricing” section of Tack Sail’s website. In the case of a Mk III, it’s 5% less for the genoa, 1% less for the main, and 3% more for the spinnaker.
You’ll be hard-pressed to get a confirmed answer as to the sailcloth (manufacturer, weight, and style) to be used for these sails. Some mass-production lofts in the Far East buy in bulk based on price (there’s that ugly purchasing-based-on-price thing again!), sometimes end-of-line or seconds, and even if manufactured in US, they’re cloths often not sold to the North American market.
Aftersales service (warranty or otherwise) could be challenging for sails made in Thailand and distributed from Quebec.
Most telling, however, is the comment from Tack Sails website that “In most cases, we already have the right dimensions for your boat”. C&C 27’s have a multitude of cutback measurements at the gooseneck, different outhaul connections, unique inboard genoa track locations, and furling gear with varying lengths and drum heights. All these details and others should be considered when designing and building sails for your boat.
In Toronto (where many C&C 27’s and their owners live) there’s already an established distributor for Rolly Tasker Sails (ShoreLine Sails at www.shorelinesails.com has been around for several years). Is Wayne Gooderham involved in this offer?
In my humble opinion (and opinions are worth exactly what you paid for ‘em!), if you must go the mail-order route for sails, check out FX Sails (www.fxsails.com). Someone at our club bought a main and genoa from them last year, they’re the equivalent of Rolly Tasker in quality and construction using known sailcloth, and are even a bit cheaper than Task Sail’s quote.
In my (even humbler!) opinion overall, I’d suggest sticking with a local loft that understands your requirements, your boat, and the conditions you sail in. If the sails are made locally (often not the case, even with the biggies nowadays), that’s even better! They may appear to cost a few dollars more, but that expense should provide a product better designed, spec’d, assembled, and serviced to meet your needs.
Oh yeah, and for the purpose of full disclosure, I should mention that I derive some income from the sailmaking and sailcloth manufacturing industries!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path
C&C 27 Mk III #632
Yes, it's fine for use onboard, the only safety concern is storage of cannisters, and that's a no-brainer!
When we're cruising, we keep them in a bag made of unresinated sailbag material (sunbrella would be fine too) hanging on the stern rail - no better natural ventilation and not unattractive either. Very similar to Magma's "Propane Storage Locker Bag" found at this link:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/producte/10001/-1/10001/19434/0/0/magma%20tote%20bag/All_2/mode+matchallpartial/0/0
For a slightly cheaper version (or easier to make oneself!), but still perfectly functional due to the light weight of butane cannisters, check this one out:
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/producte/10001/-1/10001/66663/0/0/lifeline%20bags/All_2/mode+matchallpartial/0/0
Shouldn't cost more than $20 from your canvasman/sailmaker if you've got a good relationship with them...
So, for a total investment of under $100 I've got a fast-heating, safe, and portable single-burner solution, and added a large storage locker to our galley.
At the other extreme, one could choose to go the route of installing an LPG system, complete with stove, solenoid, hoses, tank, storage, venting, control system, and sniffers. Like David says, "an absurdly expensive proposition but much less hassle".
I guess we don't cruise enough to justify the expense, so we'll just have to tough it out and manage the hassle for three weeks in the North Channel this summer!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path
C&C 27-3 #632
If you're not cooking on the stove too much, a very attractive option is to buy a single burner butane stove - we got ours a million years ago at Mountain Co-Op and their are similar but slightly bulkier versions available at any Canadian Tire, hardware store, or probably even WalMart nowadays! They use disposable butane canisters which are not the most cost or fuel effective, but are easy to store, readily available, and simple to use.
Takes up very little space, canisters can be stored simply, and the best benefit of all was when we ripped out the old alky stove and built an enclosed storage locker with lid into the same space. It's amazing how much space that old stove took up!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path
C&C 27-3 #632
PHRF-Lake Erie labels and rates 'em as follows:
C&C 27-1 at 213 vs. PHRF-LO 27-1 at 198
C&C 27-1 TR at 204 vs. PHRF-LO 27-2 at 198
C&C 27-2 at 195 vs. PHRF-LO 27-3 at 186
C&C 27-3 at 180 vs. PHRF-LO 27-5 at 174
Just to confuse things even more, keep in mind PHRF-LO ratings are 2005, and will change (all +6) in 2006.
FYI, any competent sailmaker can make good sails for the C&C 27 (all marks). There's nothing magical about our boats, and no need to follow the herd to the biggies. If you've had good experiences with them in the past, great, but if you have some specific ideas of what you'd like (as opposed to what they tell you is needed), prepare to be disappointed...
I've had poor quality and service experiences with both, so have been working with a small independent Toronto-based loft for four years with excellent success in Lake Simcoe's PHRF fleet, specifically against an active, well-prepped fleet of C&C 27-5's with North and Quantum's latest and greatest...
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path
C&C 27-3 #632
WIGMAN, don't even consider changing to a Hunter keel without some serious consultation time with a naval architect. It's not as simple as making an adaptor plate and bolting it on...
There's questions of balance and structure to be considered. Old C&C's have that reasonably unique sharkfin keel shape - anything else will have a big impact on balance and handling under sail, and will become a big factor if you ever want to resell the boat.
And David, it looks like you've spent too much time listening to LJB's "Don't Try to Lay no Boogie Woogie on The King of Rock and Roll"! Always loved the courtroom scene!!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path
1976 Mark III #632
Hi Hugh,
First, answers to your questions:
1) NO!
2) NO!
Now, the details! I don't have specific knowledge or experience of the carbon/kevlar material, but have purchased (too) many laminate sails over the last fifteen years from more sailmakers than I can forget, so here are my thoughts:
I'm not sure the various measurements you've been given by your sailmaker are much help. What're the actual luff lengths when new? Now at rest? Now under "moderate tension"? Now under sixty pound tension? And why sixty pounds? Typical halyard tension in any breeze would be way higher than that, did the sailmaker use sixty because it's simple for them to measure? Not sure it provides any valid data.
I've never encountered a laminate sail where I noticed it's "elasticity" increased with age. Typical laminates shrink at varying degrees through a sail's useful life, then begin to stretch out with age and less careful use. I've not heard of two similarly constructed sails exhibiting elasticity differences as you've described, and have crewed in active one-design fleets where such a variance would be quite apparent. I guess I'm suggesting "elasticity" is a red herring the sailmaker's using to deflect attention from the fact that the sails were not built to the same dimensions (as I'd guess they should've been) and/or one of the sails was constructed poorly and/or one of the sails was built using defective laminate.
Do you and your competitor set, sail, and store your sails equally? What about the conditions he sailed in before you got your genoa in August? What I'm trying to establish is that it's kinda pointless to compare your sail to another - your concern is over the cut, shape, and durability of your own genoa, not someone elses.
So, what about your sail?
Let's start with size - did the luff length shrink sufficiently over the season to enable a full hoist? Was the sail uninterrupted at deck level, shrouds, and spreaders? How about clew position - did it match your track location?
What about shape - were you happy with the shape - draft, curves, adjustability?
And finally, what about performance? Could you match your buddy's height and speed? Is it fair to make those comparisons based on the boats' prep and crews' sailing experience?
If your concerns are based on the comparisons of the two sails and not your actual performance, set that aside and concentrate on working with what you've got.
If, on the other hand, you're struggling compared to the competition, you need some better answers from your sailmaker than "elasticity" and unexplainable dimension variances. You deserve an understandable explanation and corrective action plan, not some salesman's smoke-and-mirrors routine. Talk to the loft's head designer or owner to get a better understanding of what's happened.
So, what's the bottom line? How'd you like the new sail? How's Blue Zulu going?
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
1976 Mark III #632
Howdy Pat! I figured my comments'd bring someone from the Mk V brigade out!
Don't recall admitting the Mk III's rating's wrong, but I suppose since there's only 46 of them with active PHRF-LO certificates anything's possible...
There's 23 Mk V IB's and 4 Mk V OB's with certificates too - I presume they're rated OK?
Yep, I think that in the LSIS spinnaker division Critical Path has a good shot at long distance races, but that's as much due to the fact we're the slowest-rated boat in the fleet as it is to the advantages we've enjoyed in the conditions so classically illustrated in LSIS #8 the last two years. On the other hand, we don't exactly smoke the fleet in the puffy stuff, do we? Somedays you're hot, somedays you're not - it's the PHRF mantra!
So c'mon, if 12 seconds is the wrong number, how's about suggesting what you think the delta should be between the Mk V (a 1984 design somewhat influenced by MORC), and the Mk III (a 1974 redesign of the 1970 original classic racer/cruiser). 6 seconds? Level? Are you suggesting Rob Ball didn't get it right the last time round?
I love sailing against newer and "hotter" designs in our fleet, and the suggestion our rating's wrong always makes me smile - truly the kindest form of flattery there is to a racing sailor!
Our haulout's next weekend - your's too, right?
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
C&C 27 Mk III #632
So it's finally happened! After six years of competing in the LSIS interclub racing series on Lake Simcoe on our Mk III Critical Path, someone else up here's finally interested in finding one to add to our mixed PHRF fleet.
For those who aren't familiar with Lake Simcoe, while we've had more than our fair share of windy days over the last few years, our sailing conditions are typically light winds (<10 knots) and flat water, and since our LSIS series includes several point-to-point distance races, the wind often goes quite light for some time during the race, allowing us with our (relatively) tall rigs and (relatively) slow ratings to make hay, particularly with the fleet of several C&C 27 Mk V's.
So, does anyone know of a (hopefully) race-equipped and relatively clean Mk III or IV for sale in Ontario? This potential buyer's very concerned about the deck conditions of older C&C's (he's seen what we went through with our boat - check out "Deck Repairs" in the "Black Arts" section!), so fixer-uppers need not apply.
If there's one at your club or anywhere else, please drop me a note or reply here.
Thanks very much!
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
1976 C&C 27 Mk III #632
IMHO if you're looking for consistently good performance in a competitive PHRF or one-design fleet, you're gonna have to bite the bullet, spend some cash, and drill some holes in your deck... Older 27's are not particularly close-winded to start with, so you want the ability to point and foot as well as the design’s capable of whenever needed – anything less is the typical racer’s lament for less-than-optimal performance…
It's all about sheeting angle and it's contribution to your genoa's shape. That’s the angle between the centreline of the boat and the line from the sheet lead to the tack point of the sail. Any sailmaker will tell you the optimum upwind sheeting angle for a #1 genoa on a typical racer/cruiser is anywhere from 7.5 to 10 degrees depending on wind and wave conditions.
Sheeting to the toe rail of our Mk III gives a sheeting angle of about 13 degrees. Moving the lead as far inboard as possible (within 1-2 inches of the coaming) reduces the angle to about 9 degrees. Sheeting angles of your Mk IV would be even greater (about 1 degree) due to the shorter J measurement. The closer the sheeting angle, the better the twist at the top of the sail and flatness at the bottom as you ease the lead back in windy or wavy conditions. Skirting the foot of the genoa inside the lifelines will be easier and reduce wear with inboard tracks. Oh yeah, and it'll also add more stress to your lifeline stanchions as you ease the sheet out...
Finally, if you're thinking about new sails, the sail shape should vary quite a bit depending on where your leads are located. I'd hate to invest in a high dollar racing genoa (carbon? you're sure 'bout that choice??), and not have it match the boat's equipment and optimal layout...
The tracks don't have to be long (30" per side should be more than adequate if they're just for a #1), and location could be advised by your sailmaker and those who've got 'em installed already. If you haven't already, check out "Genoa Tracks" in the "Black Arts" section of this website for info on installation and locations...
Older C&C's need help to keep them moving to windward efficiently to overcome our less-than-optimal foil shapes and sailplan configurations, and inboard tracks are an integral part of that setup to create an all-round performer.
Cheers,
Tal Wolf
Critical Path
1976 C&C 27 Mk III #632
The 27 I crew on each year for Barrie Yacht Club's Mark V regatta converted his spin launch system to a companionway bag this year that seemed to work quite well. Nice not to have any repacking or rerigging, especially when you're running short windward-leeward legs. You do have to be comfortable with windward or leeward douses depending on which gybe you approach the leeward mark, but that's no problem...
I've also sailed on a C&C 33 Mk I that uses a companionway bag, but unless you've got a full crew compliment that's a ton of nylon to get out from under the boom, get the guy up to the pole, and the head up to the masthead without any snafus!
So now I'm thinking about my own 27 Mark III. I'm not sure how many racers are left on this board, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on spinnaker hoists. On Critical Path we currently use a box bag clipped to the lifelines just forward of the forward lowers on the leeward side, but what do y'all think of companionway hoists for a Mark III-sized chute? I tend to race shorthanded (typically only 3 or 4 of us onboard), so it'd really help not to have to contend with rerigging or packing on upwind legs...
So, what do you use (or have seen used!), and how do you like it? Any improvements you'd suggest? Other comments?
Thanks a bunch!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Critical Path, #632
You say po-"teh"-to and I'll say po-"tah"-to!
Warren, my comments were geared towards the standard rig configurations of the Mark's I and II as described in the "Overview" and "Evolution" sections of this website. Some people (and other PHRF regions) refer to what's known here as a Mk II as a Mk I tall rig, what's a Mk III as a Mk II, and as a Mk IV as a Mk III. None of this applies to your specific boat!
If your rig has single lower shrouds and a babystay, then it is not a standard factory rig, and becomes a red herring when discussing heights and configurations of the various models. The standing rigging is not a standard configuration (since there's a babystay), so who's to say whether or not the rig height has also been altered...
One other comment - "Any good sailmaker" should not "want" the actual measurements, but rather should come to your boat to ensure the accuracy and completeness of measurements and other required info. Having too much experience with ill-fitting sails when first delivered, I would not consider purchasing another sail from a loft who either don't know my boat personally or haven't already made sails for it in the past...
Cheers,
Tal Wolf ../)../)..
Critical Path, 1976 C&C 27 Mk III #632
Wow! That's a very confusing description of "I"! Here's how PHRF - Lake Ontario describes it:
"the distance from the deck (or estimated level of the deck) at the mast up to the intersection of the headstay with the forward face of the mast".
Another way I've heard is to imagine that I's top measurement is where the headstay meets the front of the mast & the bottom measurement is (the theoretical spot) where a perpendicular line is drawn back from where the forestay meets the deck to the face of the mast.
The key here is that either of all 3 of these definitions result in a lower measurement point that falls somewhere about 4"-6" below the mast step! So the quick answer to your question is "NO, I is not the length of your mast!".
If you're not sure whether you've got a Mk I or II rig, a tape measure should quickly ease (or confirm!) your fears. I'd suggest the mast lengths should be somewhere around 32'6" & 34'6" respectively...
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Hugh? Hugh Morrin?? Grew up in Kingston??? If so, didn't we race against each other in Junior Squadron, Sharks, etc.???? In any case, congrats on the new boat! You must be pumped!!
We're in the midst of a deck recoring on Critical Path (1976 Mark III #632) - check out the thread titled "Inboard Tracks for Blade or #3" for more details. The Path has inboard tracks which are appropriate length and position for foresails from 140% (a big #2) to 163% (class max). I recall my sailmaker deciding that their location provides appropriate sheeting angles for a boat of our vintage & style! The tracks are 42" long & 1" profile - just fine for the 27. Check out the pics in the photo album entitled "Critical Path refit 2004" found at:
<A href="http://www.snapfish.com/">www.snapfish.com</A>, access using email "<A href="mailto:talwolf@hotmail.com">talwolf@hotmail.com</A>" & password "critpath".
I'm adding 2' x 1" inboard tracks for the blade now too. I got a 4' length from my rigger at The Rigging Shoppe in Scarboro for $45.
We'll be going the overdrill, fill, & redrill route when it comes time to reattach the deck hardware, & I won't subject my new deck to the less-than-optimal "oversized washers will be good enough" approach. We're cutting small windows in the liner where required to install aluminum backing plates along the entire length of track. The openings in the liner will only be noticeable when sitting down in the main cabin (remember they're tucked up under the side deck), & we plan to finish them off with either white plexiglass or thin wood covers. Easily removeable too, so future maintenance isn't a pain (& there will ALWAYS be maintenance involved with inboard tracks!). Unfortunately, all the track pieces span bulkheads &/or knees, so each length will be supported by multiple backing plates on either side of the obstruction.
I'd hazard a guess that a single length of track isn't the best choice for old-style 27's. A single straight piece would compromise the sheeting position for at least 1 of your sails (likely too tight an angle for the #2), & would require drilling even more holes into your deck. Keep in mind this comes from a guy who's removing some 25+ bits & pieces of miscellaneous deck hardware (& 3 winches!) that won't go back on after the work's done! If there's a way to keep the number of holes down, just do it!
Critical Path (ex Tiny Dancer ex Hibernator) came with milk crates full of old hardware, so I've got sliders & blocks for all 4 tracks. If you're not racing much I'm sure 2 sliders & blocks that you moved from track to track as required would work just fine.
David Weatherston's routine for drilling & filling is elegant & will no doubt ensure a near perfect job. I'm not quite as persnickety, but manage to get the job done without too much mess. On the other hand, I bet David feels a whole bunch more satisfied when he's done than I do! The explanation & process are without fault, but I do have one question for David. Do you line up the screw heads in a fore-and-aft configuration or prefer side-to-side? <IMG src="http://www.cc27association.com/f3/toast/emoticons/icon_mrgreen.gif" border=0>
Drill from above, don't squash the liner - make cutouts for washers (argh! washers!) or backing plates, & 3/16" x 1" aluminum is thicker but not as wide as I'd like...
Inboard tracks will benefit *any* foresail's upwind performance, regardless of original cut & current condition. Where it'll really pay dividends is when you get that new carbon #1 made-to-order!
Cheers,
Tal Wolf ../)../)..
Critical Path, 1976 Mark III #632
I wholeheartedly agree with all that David's written! I own the basket case that's mentioned in the thread titled "Inboard Tracks for Blade or #3". We're currently undergoing a deck refit due to what could be considered a "huge problem"!
We bought the boat 7 years ago well aware that the deck was an issue. The purchase price reflected the condition of the boat (> 30% less than market rate at the time). Got 6 good years of use out of the boat, then let it sit for a year while we saved up our pennies...
The 27's just right for us & we don't want any other boat, just ours with the deck repaired. A job of this magnitude is way out of my league + I've had 7 years to think about how & where to have the repairs done, so we'll end up not too far from where we'd hoped to be in terms of cost. Of course, the problem is that since the deck's gonna be shiny & updated, I want the rest of the boat perfect too!!
Still have a very long way to go until we've pumped anywhere near what some other 27 owners have in their boats (right, Bob?!), but we're definately on the ragged edge of what's financially prudent, & passionately illogical justifications are beginning to take over!
To check out the work on Critical Path, click the link below (& come back for weekly updates!):
<A href="http://www.snapfish.com/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=11315942/t_=9087692">http://www.snapfish.com/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=11315942/t_=9087692</A>
<IMG src="http://www.cc27association.com/f3/toast/emoticons/icon_exclaim.gif" border=0><IMG src="http://www.cc27association.com/f3/toast/emoticons/icon_exclaim.gif" border=0> Snapfish isn't the most user-friendly site to view other people's pictures, so if required, use <A href="mailto:talwolf@hotmail.com">talwolf@hotmail.com</A> as the email & "critpath" for the password to gain access...
Cheers,
Tal Wolf ../)../)..
Critical Path
1976 C&C 27 Mark III #632
After 7 years of sailing Critical Path with a squishy deck, she's finally in the shop for the replacement of about 60 square feet of soggy core this winter! I was down at the boat the other day taking a wackload of pics to figure out what deck hardware to keep, what to turf, & what to replace.
We're gonna move the stanchions out to the rail with new bases from HMP & delrin shims for inserts, but can't justify the expense of new pulpits, so I've spec'd solid glass under all pulpit base points. Other than taking off a bunch of old unused hardware & 3 winches & replacing some equipment with newer pieces, there won't be many changes in deck layout, just some updating!
My questions are to those who have double lower shrouds (Marks II, III, & IV). What I'm trying to figure out is genoa tracks. I've got 42" tracks just outside the coaming that work fine for the #1 & #2 so they'll stay where they are, but I'm wondering what to do for the blade. We've been sheeting to a snatch block on the toe rail & using inhaulers (a real "Rube Goldberg" creation that works, but not efficiently!). The sail's shape was built for a compromise sheeting location somewhere between the rail & a favoured inboard position. My sailmaker assures me it'll work more effectively if I install permanent inboard tracks, but I'm not sure I agree with his suggested location, so I'd like some more input.
Could you please describe if/where (fore-and-aft & side-to-side) you have forward tracks mounted on the side decks? Between the inners & outer? Or inside them all? How long should the tracks be? How do you run your sheets through the shrouds?
Another important decision I need to make is how to "prepare" the deck below the inboard tracks. The shop says overdrilled holes, filled with epoxy, & redrilled to fit the bolt size will work just fine (& that's how the rest of the deck equipment will be installed), but I'm not sure. The tracks carry an incredible load at times, & I've found them almost impossible to keep sealed for more than a year... Wouldn't solid glass at the track mounting spots be a better solution? What about backing plates? How to construct them without damaging (or squashing!) the interior liner?
Thanks in advance for any &/or all advice!
Cheers,
Tal Wolf ../)../)..
Critical Path, C&C 27 #632