CAL 29 high wind sails

Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? Thanks Randy Out Patient CAL 2-29 #512 Channel Islands CA

Randy, I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. Just my experiences. Wilkie On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, > what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did > a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short > hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very > well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow > around until the gusts were over. > > I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers > create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the > back stay it was reall mushy. > > Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they > support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to > attach everything to. > > How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? > > Thanks > Randy > > Out Patient > CAL 2-29 #512 > Channel Islands CA > > >

Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole. Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? Thanks again -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote:   Randy, I removed my forward lowers.  I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds.  This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade.  It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds.  It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%.  In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. The single lower modification did not work out very well.  I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book.  The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly.  I don't recommend doing it.  Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind.    OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. Just my experiences. Wilkie On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote:Hey fellow CAL 29 owners,what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? ThanksRandy Out PatientCAL 2-29 #512Channel Islands CA

I just put a #3 on my L-36 inside the rigging without moving the forward lower just a few weeks ago. The clew is ab out 18 inches off the deck. The lower the clew, the larger sail you can get and still clear the forward lower. I installed track about 2 inches off the cabin side. The sail is a Quantum cursing laminate with taffeta-mylar-Dacron threads-mylar-taffeta and has 4 batons. Going from a Dacron sail to this higher tech batoned sail added about 30% to the cost of the sail. I went with it because I was worried about a skinny high aspect sail holding its shape. This sail holds its shape under any wind up to the 30+ knots we have tried it in so far. As far as how we deal with the high winds, we let the main out until the boat is healing less than 25 degrees. Last race was in over 30 knots and the main was flogging on the beat but we were able to chase down the other boats and finished 37 seconds behind the first boat to cross the line and they owed us 2 1/2 minutes. Many boats that crossed behind us owed us even more time. We are pointing about 29 degrees to the apparent wind. By the way, we sail with the windward tell-tail pointing straight up when the wind is strong, which it usually is around here (SF Bay). One of the other L-36s around here raced once in 40 knots of wind with a 155 jib. He just let the main flog. It was an offshore race of several hours in length and he beat the second place boat by 1/2 hour. I have no idea how similar a Cal 29 is but thought this might be useful information. Allen On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:08 AM, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Randy, > > I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main > bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. > It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the > shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and > over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but > works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I > need a #4 as well. > > The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the > math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem > is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 > inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't > recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that > helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be > rigged to slack for downwind. > > OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds > without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale > anyway. > > Just my experiences. > > Wilkie > > > > On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > > Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, > what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race > with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. > It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my > boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. > > I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create > problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it > was reall mushy. > > Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the > mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything > to.** > > How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? > > Thanks > Randy > > Out Patient > CAL 2-29 #512 > Channel Islands CA > > > > >

Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and attach a photo Wilkie On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: > Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using > the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then > disconnecting it down wind for the pole. > > Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? > > Thanks again > > > > > -- Sent from my Palm Pixi > > On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > Randy, > > I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same > main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full > hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides > and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably > about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does > not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the > full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. > > The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all > the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. > The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, > which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake > (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll > install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in > the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack > for downwind. > > OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the > shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good > point of sale anyway. > > Just my experiences. > > Wilkie > > > > On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > >> >> Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, >> what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did >> a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a >> short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point >> very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and >> wallow around until the gusts were over. >> >> I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward >> lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I >> pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. >> >> Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they >> support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light >> to attach everything to. >> >> How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? >> >> Thanks >> Randy >> >> Out Patient >> CAL 2-29 #512 >> Channel Islands CA >> >> > > > >

Wilkie, Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being told I have to reapply. Randy -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen &lt;dw… [at] cox.net&gt; wrote: Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. &nbsp;So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. &nbsp;Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? &nbsp;Can't visualize it in my mind until&nbsp; Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. &nbsp;He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. &nbsp;Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. &nbsp;I will try and attach a photo&nbsp;Wilkie On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote:Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole.Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads?Thanks again-- Sent from my Palm PixiOn Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen &lt;dw… [at] cox.net&gt; wrote:&nbsp;&nbsp;Randy,I removed my forward lowers. &nbsp;I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. &nbsp;This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. &nbsp;It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. &nbsp;It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. &nbsp;In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work.&nbsp;It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over.&nbsp;I need a #4 as well.The single lower modification did not work out very well. &nbsp;I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. &nbsp;The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. &nbsp;I don't recommend doing it. &nbsp;Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. &nbsp;&nbsp;OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway.Just my experiences.WilkieOn Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote:Hey fellow CAL 29 owners,what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over.&nbsp;I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards&nbsp;back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy.&nbsp;Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to.&nbsp;How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind?&nbsp;ThanksRandy&nbsp;Out PatientCAL 2-29 #512Channel Islands CA

PHRF Rating does not consider shroud placement. From: Randall Alcorn <sa… [at] yahoo.com> To: "Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com" <ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:39 PM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails [1 Attachment] [Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] Wilkie, Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being told I have to reapply. Randy -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and attach a photo Wilkie On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole. > >Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? > >Thanks again > > > > >-- Sent from my Palm Pixi > On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >Randy, > > >I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. > > >The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. > > >OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. > > >Just my experiences. > > >Wilkie > > > > > > >On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > >> >>Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, >>what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. >> >>I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. >> >>Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. >> >>How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? >> >>Thanks >>Randy >> >>Out Patient >>CAL 2-29 #512 >>Channel Islands CA >> >> >> > > > > > Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn 1 of 1 Photo(s) Unnamed_1276623042194

Be careful... if it's moved you should state it... it is possible the committee will note and ignore, or give you a 3 second hit, just because you changed it from stock... there must have been a reason? (faster) or better sheeting angle (sail higher).... From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mike farrell Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 2:46 PM To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails PHRF Rating does not consider shroud placement. From: Randall Alcorn <sa… [at] yahoo.com> To: "Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com" <ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:39 PM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails [1 Attachment] [Attachment(s)<http://us.mg3.mail.yahoo.com/dc/blank.html?bn=397.8&.intl=us&.lang=en-US#TopText> from Randall Alcorn included below] Wilkie, Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being told I have to reapply. Randy -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and attach a photo Wilkie [cid:EB… [at] sd.cox.net] On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole. Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? Thanks again -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net<mailto:dw… [at] cox.net>> wrote: Randy, I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. Just my experiences. Wilkie On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? Thanks Randy Out Patient CAL 2-29 #512 Channel Islands CA Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn 1 of 1 Photo(s) [http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/16485695/tn/1167706688]<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cal_Boats/attachments/folder/220248802/item/1167706688/view> Unnamed_1276623042194<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cal_Boats/attachments/folder/220248802/item/1167706688/view>

Thanks Timm, I was afraid of that, the biggest gain would to be able tack easier and sheet in faster. Then to add a blade would be able to add more power to weather without backwinding the main. I found the sail locker for a CAL 29. I just might have to stay original designs and see what happens. The sail that blew up was not the same measurement and LP for a working jib. I was hoping someone from San Fransico would respond, San Fran had the biggest CAL 29 one design fleet at one time, now it is all Catalina 30s. Randy From: "ti… [at] ch2m.com" <ti… [at] ch2m.com> To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 3:04:26 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails Be careful… if it’s moved you should state it… it is possible the committee will note and ignore, or give you a 3 second hit, just because you changed it from stock… there must have been a reason? (faster) or better sheeting angle (sail higher)…. From:Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:Cal_ Boats@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf Of mike farrell Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 2:46 PM To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails PHRF Rating does not consider shroud placement. From:Randall Alcorn <saylorran@yahoo. com> To: "Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com" <cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com> Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:39 PM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails [1 Attachment] [Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] Wilkie, Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being told I have to reapply. Randy -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and attach a photo Wilkie On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole. Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? Thanks again -- Sent from my Palm Pixi On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: Randy, I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. Just my experiences. Wilkie On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? Thanks Randy Out Patient CAL 2-29 #512 Channel Islands CA Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn 1 of 1 Photo(s) Unnamed_12766230421 94

Randy, I no longer race PHRF but I would certainly expect to be re-rated if I did. My local sailing buddies find my rating out of date and have urged that I apply for a more favorable rating, but doubt that will happen at this point in my sailing life. Others might think that I just suck, but I actually have an extremely winning record helming, more modern boats. Wilkie On Jun 17, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Randall Alcorn wrote: > [Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] > Wilkie, > > Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being > told I have to reapply. > > Randy > > > > > -- Sent from my Palm Pixi > > On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the > light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch > it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little > higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until > > Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both > shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great > older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the > cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and > attach a photo > Wilkie > > > > > On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: > >> Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using >> the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then >> disconnecting it down wind for the pole. >> >> Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? >> >> Thanks again >> >> >> >> >> -- Sent from my Palm Pixi >> >> On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Randy, >> >> I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same >> main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full >> hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides >> and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably >> about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does >> not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the >> full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. >> >> The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did >> all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging >> book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the >> bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast >> to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe >> I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then >> it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged >> to slack for downwind. >> >> OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the >> shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good >> point of sale anyway. >> >> Just my experiences. >> >> Wilkie >> >> >> >> On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: >> >>> >>> Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, >>> what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we >>> did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a >>> short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not >>> point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side >>> and wallow around until the gusts were over. >>> >>> I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward >>> lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I >>> pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. >>> >>> Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they >>> support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light >>> to attach everything to. >>> >>> How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Randy >>> >>> Out Patient >>> CAL 2-29 #512 >>> Channel Islands CA >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >

More of my .02 cents worth.... I don't find the boat much easier to tack and the blade / full main combo doesn't point significantly higher than my #2 sheeted on an inside track (or barber-hauled.) I love the idea, but the reality is I rarely get to run that combo. I think I'm also ready to pronounce that making a Cal 29 point higher (even just 3 or 4 degrees) carries the penalty that she just don't wanna roll that way and is so less-efficient at it that you are better off giving her what she wants and meeting the other boats as you cross tacks. I don't know... make any sense? I seem do do better running for speed and timing my crosses for maximum clean air and minimum ducking. If I slog along in the gas of a boat that is designed to point higher than Mariposa, they just sail away from me. What I do like is that I can run my spinnaker pole back to the main shrouds and really wing that sucker out DDW, which might save me a gybe to the leeward mark, but the spin and main are both just sort of blocking the wind instead of drawing and I've yet to catch anyone running hotter and gybing as required so WTF? Bottom line is that I spent a lot of cash for not much net. Maybe Bill Lapworth knew what he was doing and I shouldn't be trying to race modern boats using their tactics. So between that and the lack of local participation of other comparable boats, I am happy sailing under the SBYC's CHRF rating system, which attempts to compensate for wind and boat size factors on a weekly basis. Wilkie On Jun 17, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > Thanks Timm, > > I was afraid of that, the biggest gain would to be able tack easier > and sheet in faster. Then to add a blade would be able to add more > power to weather without backwinding the main. > > I found the sail locker for a CAL 29. I just might have to stay > original designs and see what happens. The sail that blew up was not > the same measurement and LP for a working jib. > > I was hoping someone from San Fransico would respond, San Fran had > the biggest CAL 29 one design fleet at one time, now it is all > Catalina 30s. > > Randy > > From: "ti… [at] ch2m.com" <ti… [at] ch2m.com> > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 3:04:26 PM > Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails > > > > Be careful… if it’s moved you should state it… it is possible the > committee will note and ignore, > > > or give you a 3 second hit, just because you changed it from stock… > > > there must have been a reason? > > > (faster) or better sheeting angle (sail higher)…. > > > > > From: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:Cal_ Boats@yahoogroup > s.com] On Behalf Of mike farrell > Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 2:46 PM > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails > > > > PHRF Rating does not consider shroud placement. > > > From: Randall Alcorn <saylorran@yahoo. com> > To: "Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com" <cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com> > Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:39 PM > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails [1 Attachment] > > [Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] > > Wilkie, > > Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being > told I have to reapply. > > Randy > > > > > > -- Sent from my Palm Pixi > > > > > On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the > light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch > it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little > higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until > > > Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both > shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great > older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the > cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and > attach a photo > > Wilkie > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: > > > > > Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using > the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then > disconnecting it down wind for the pole. > > Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? > > Thanks again > > > > > > -- Sent from my Palm Pixi > > > On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Randy, > > > I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same > main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full > hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides > and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably > about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does > not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the > full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. > > > The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all > the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. > The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, > which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake > (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll > install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in > the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack > for downwind. > > > OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the > shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good > point of sale anyway. > > > Just my experiences. > > > Wilkie > > > > > On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > > > > > Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, > > what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did > a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short > hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very > well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow > around until the gusts were over. > > > I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers > create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the > back stay it was reall mushy. > > > Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they > support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to > attach everything to. > > > How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? > > > Thanks > > Randy > > > Out Patient > > CAL 2-29 #512 > > Channel Islands CA > > > > > > > > > Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn > > 1 of 1 Photo(s) > > > > Unnamed_12766230421 94 > > > > > >

Wilkie, You are the inspiration to all of us CAL 29 ers. I am only trying to keep the 29 in the hunt. Randy From: David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 6:15:29 PM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails Randy, I no longer race PHRF but I would certainly expect to be re-rated if I did. My local sailing buddies find my rating out of date and have urged that I apply for a more favorable rating, but doubt that will happen at this point in my sailing life. Others might think that I just suck, but I actually have an extremely winning record helming, more modern boats. Wilkie On Jun 17, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Randall Alcorn wrote: [Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] >Wilkie, > >Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being told I have to reapply. > >Randy > > > > >-- Sent from my Palm Pixi > On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > >Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until > > >Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and attach a photo >Wilkie > > > > > >On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: > >Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole. >> >>Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? >> >>Thanks again >> >> >> >> >>-- Sent from my Palm Pixi >> On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Randy, >> >> >>I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. >> >> >>The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. >> >> >>OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. >> >> >>Just my experiences. >> >> >>Wilkie >> >> >> >> >> >> >>On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: >> >> >>> >>>Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, >>>what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. >>> >>>I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. >>> >>>Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. >>> >>>How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? >>> >>>Thanks >>>Randy >>> >>>Out Patient >>>CAL 2-29 #512 >>>Channel Islands CA >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > >

Down here in Oxnard, the waters have a little more wind than up in Santa Barbra. Our wet Wednesdays are normally 15-25. Once in a while we get the 35 plus. I just need something to handle the winds up to 35. We don't cancel many races. I read somewhere that Bill Lapworth said that a CAL rides over the waves and was not designed to bust thru them. Maybe that is why the sail plan is designed low and not made to point so high. Ok, I think I am staying stock again. We hardly ever get 25-35 flat seas. They are normally 10-12 with 14-16ers thrown in. Thanks From: David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 6:33:47 PM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails More of my .02 cents worth.... I don't find the boat much easier to tack and the blade / full main combo doesn't point significantly higher than my #2 sheeted on an inside track (or barber-hauled. ) I love the idea, but the reality is I rarely get to run that combo. I think I'm also ready to pronounce that making a Cal 29 point higher (even just 3 or 4 degrees) carries the penalty that she just don't wanna roll that way and is so less-efficient at it that you are better off giving her what she wants and meeting the other boats as you cross tacks. I don't know... make any sense? I seem do do better running for speed and timing my crosses for maximum clean air and minimum ducking. If I slog along in the gas of a boat that is designed to point higher than Mariposa, they just sail away from me. What I do like is that I can run my spinnaker pole back to the main shrouds and really wing that sucker out DDW, which might save me a gybe to the leeward mark, but the spin and main are both just sort of blocking the wind instead of drawing and I've yet to catch anyone running hotter and gybing as required so WTF? Bottom line is that I spent a lot of cash for not much net. Maybe Bill Lapworth knew what he was doing and I shouldn't be trying to race modern boats using their tactics. So between that and the lack of local participation of other comparable boats, I am happy sailing under the SBYC's CHRF rating system, which attempts to compensate for wind and boat size factors on a weekly basis. Wilkie On Jun 17, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > >Thanks Timm, > >I was afraid of that, the biggest gain would to be able tack easier and sheet in faster. Then to add a blade would be able to add more power to weather without backwinding the main. > >I found the sail locker for a CAL 29. I just might have to stay original designs and see what happens. The sail that blew up was not the same measurement and LP for a working jib. > >I was hoping someone from San Fransico would respond, San Fran had the biggest CAL 29 one design fleet at one time, now it is all Catalina 30s. > >Randy > > > From: "timmothy.lessley@ ch2m.com" <timmothy.lessley@ ch2m.com> >To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 3:04:26 PM >Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails > > > > >Be careful… if it’s moved you should state it… it is possible the committee will note and ignore, > > >or give you a 3 second hit, just because you changed it from stock… > > >there must have been a reason? > > >(faster) or better sheeting angle (sail higher)…. > > > > > > >From: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:Cal_ Boats@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf Of mike farrell >Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 2:46 PM >To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails > > > > >PHRF Rating does not consider shroud placement. > > > >From: Randall Alcorn <saylorran@yahoo. com> >To: "Cal_Boats@yahoogro u ps.com" <cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com> >Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:39 PM >Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails [1 Attachment] > >[Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] > >Wilkie, > >Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being told I have to reapply. > >Randy > > > > > >-- Sent from my Palm Pixi > > > > >On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > >Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my mind until > > >Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and attach a photo >Wilkie > > > > > > >On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: > > > >Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then disconnecting it down wind for the pole. > >Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? > >Thanks again > > > > > >-- Sent from my Palm Pixi > > > >On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >Randy, > > >I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. > > >The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged to slack for downwind. > > >OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good point of sale anyway. > > >Just my experiences. > > >Wilkie > > > > > > >On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > > > > >Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, >what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and wallow around until the gusts were over. > > >I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. > > >Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light to attach everything to. > > >How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? > > >Thanks >Randy > > >Out Patient >CAL 2-29 #512 >Channel Islands CA > > > > > > > > > > > >Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn >1 of 1 Photo(s) >Unnamed_12766230421 94 > > > > > > >

Still would like to come down and crew for you some time. It would be fun to experience another 29 -- one that actually wins some races. Wilkie On Jun 17, 2010, at 8:50 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > > Down here in Oxnard, the waters have a little more wind than up in > Santa Barbra. Our wet Wednesdays are normally 15-25. Once in a while > we get the 35 plus. I just need something to handle the winds up to > 35. We don't cancel many races. > > I read somewhere that Bill Lapworth said that a CAL rides over the > waves and was not designed to bust thru them. Maybe that is why the > sail plan is designed low and not made to point so high. > > Ok, I think I am staying stock again. We hardly ever get 25-35 flat > seas. They are normally 10-12 with 14-16ers thrown in. > > Thanks > > From: David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 6:33:47 PM > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails > > > > > > More of my .02 cents worth.... I don't find the boat much easier to > tack and the blade / full main combo doesn't point significantly > higher than my #2 sheeted on an inside track (or barber-hauled. ) I > love the idea, but the reality is I rarely get to run that combo. > > I think I'm also ready to pronounce that making a Cal 29 point > higher (even just 3 or 4 degrees) carries the penalty that she just > don't wanna roll that way and is so less-efficient at it that you > are better off giving her what she wants and meeting the other boats > as you cross tacks. I don't know... make any sense? I seem do do > better running for speed and timing my crosses for maximum clean air > and minimum ducking. If I slog along in the gas of a boat that is > designed to point higher than Mariposa, they just sail away from me. > > What I do like is that I can run my spinnaker pole back to the main > shrouds and really wing that sucker out DDW, which might save me a > gybe to the leeward mark, but the spin and main are both just sort > of blocking the wind instead of drawing and I've yet to catch anyone > running hotter and gybing as required so WTF? > > Bottom line is that I spent a lot of cash for not much net. Maybe > Bill Lapworth knew what he was doing and I shouldn't be trying to > race modern boats using their tactics. So between that and the lack > of local participation of other comparable boats, I am happy sailing > under the SBYC's CHRF rating system, which attempts to compensate > for wind and boat size factors on a weekly basis. > > Wilkie > > > On Jun 17, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: > >> >> Thanks Timm, >> >> I was afraid of that, the biggest gain would to be able tack easier >> and sheet in faster. Then to add a blade would be able to add more >> power to weather without backwinding the main. >> >> I found the sail locker for a CAL 29. I just might have to stay >> original designs and see what happens. The sail that blew up was >> not the same measurement and LP for a working jib. >> >> I was hoping someone from San Fransico would respond, San Fran had >> the biggest CAL 29 one design fleet at one time, now it is all >> Catalina 30s. >> >> Randy >> >> From: "timmothy.lessley@ ch2m.com" <timmothy.lessley@ ch2m.com> >> To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >> Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 3:04:26 PM >> Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails >> >> >> >> Be careful… if it’s moved you should state it… it is possible the >> committee will note and ignore, >> >> >> or give you a 3 second hit, just because you changed it from stock… >> >> >> there must have been a reason? >> >> >> (faster) or better sheeting angle (sail higher)…. >> >> >> >> >> From: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:Cal_ Boats@yahoogroup >> s.com] On Behalf Of mike farrell >> Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 2:46 PM >> To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >> Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails >> >> >> >> PHRF Rating does not consider shroud placement. >> >> >> From: Randall Alcorn <saylorran@yahoo. com> >> To: "Cal_Boats@yahoogro u ps.com" <cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com> >> Sent: Thu, June 17, 2010 2:20:39 PM >> Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] CAL 29 high wind sails [1 Attachment] >> >> [Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn included below] >> >> Wilkie, >> >> Did you have to be rerated after you moved your lowers? I am being >> told I have to reapply. >> >> Randy >> >> >> >> >> >> -- Sent from my Palm Pixi >> >> >> >> >> On Jun 15, 2010 10:25, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> Couldn't figure out the topping lift reference at first, but the >> light has gone on now. So you mean the Pole topping lift -- switch >> it from the deck to the pole as needed. Maybe it's mounted a >> little higher than optimum on the mast? Can't visualize it in my >> mind until >> >> >> Since I couldn't find off-the-rack chainplates to accommodate both >> shrouds, I had them custom built by a guy here in SB. He's a great >> older machinist who likes to work with sailors. Don't remember the >> cost, but they are massive and will never ever die. I will try and >> attach a photo >> >> Wilkie >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jun 15, 2010, at 7:26 AM, Randall Alcorn wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Thanks Dave, Kevin Miller is working with me. He recommended using >> the topping lift with spectra line for the weather legs. Then >> disconnecting it down wind for the pole. >> >> Did you change your Chain plates to handle the loads? >> >> Thanks again >> >> >> >> >> >> -- Sent from my Palm Pixi >> >> >> On Jun 15, 2010 7:08, David Wilkie Owen <dw… [at] cox.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Randy, >> >> >> I removed my forward lowers. I moved the aft lowers to the same >> main bulkhead as the main shrouds. This allowed me to buy a full >> hoist blade. It sheets to a new track up against the house sides >> and right up near the shrouds. It is not quite a lapper, probably >> about 90%. In 25 knots and over I have to roll it up, which does >> not work. It is not a very good #3 but works fairly well with the >> full main in 20 knots but not really much over. I need a #4 as well. >> >> >> The single lower modification did not work out very well. I did >> all the math with the help of a rigger and Skein's (sp?) rigging >> book. The problem is the placement of the chain plates on the >> bulkhead, which is maybe 3 or 4 inches too far forward for the mast >> to rake (and shape) properly. I don't recommend doing it. Maybe >> I'll install a baby-stay some day and see if that helps -- then >> it's in the way of the pole though, so it would have to be rigged >> to slack for downwind. >> >> >> OTOH, I do like being able to run my spinnaker pole back to the >> shrouds without interference - helps DDW, but that's never a good >> point of sale anyway. >> >> >> Just my experiences. >> >> >> Wilkie >> >> >> >> >> On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Randy Alcorn wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hey fellow CAL 29 owners, >> >> what are you using as a number 3 sail? A couple of weeks ago we did >> a race with winds blowing 35 plus. My old #3 blew up. It was a >> short hoist 110ish. It attached to my genoa track and did not point >> very well. It would cause my boat to roll over on it's side and >> wallow around until the gusts were over. >> >> >> I asked my sail maker for a full hoist blade, but the forward >> lowers create problems. I moved the forwards back. But when I >> pulled on the back stay it was reall mushy. >> >> >> Finn mentioned that the CAL 40's removed theirs. How did they >> support the mast. I also think my chain plates are a little light >> to attach everything to. >> >> >> How do the San Francisco CAL 29's deal with 25-35 knots of wind? >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Randy >> >> >> Out Patient >> >> CAL 2-29 #512 >> >> Channel Islands CA >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Attachment(s) from Randall Alcorn >> >> 1 of 1 Photo(s) >> >> >> >> Unnamed_12766230421 94 >> >> >> >> >> > > > >