Why Were Not All Cals Made with Large Cabins?

After looking at the photos of Radiant and getting a bit depressed, I often wondered why all Cal Boats didn't have the double wide cabins, as shown here in Fin's Cal 40, Radiant? *http://tinyurl.com/yc7jpbw* * * *I often daydream of tearing out the galley on the port side and making the cabin look like this on my Cal 28. The galley could be placed elsewhere. * * * *Apart from the cost, are there any other drawbacks to placing the galley near the companionway? I see the new Cal 2-28 has such a layout. With the raised deck, the interior of the Cal 28 would be huge if reconfigured like the Cal 40 interior. * * * * * * * -- Robert Bruce Stirling, II, Esq. 602.254.6638 602.460.5631 [Cell] 602-507-9445 [Fax] 520-302-5206 [Tucson] br… [at] stirlinglaw.com http://www.stirlinglaw.com/lawyers The information in this e-mail communication is Privileged and Confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the undersigned sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.

The traditional galley (from the days of Bolero) was placed forward because it was used by the professional cook in a large crew. The latter day boats have galleys aft and my Yankee 38 had one that was partly under the cockpit sole. It's a matter of getting more bunks. MIke Kennedy Conquest Cal 40 # 96 On Mar 22, 2010, at 9:08 PM, Bruce Stirling wrote: > After looking at the photos of Radiant and getting a bit depressed, > I often wondered why all Cal Boats didn't have the double wide > cabins, as shown here in Fin's Cal 40, Radiant? http://tinyurl.com/yc7jpbw > > > I often daydream of tearing out the galley on the port side and > making the cabin look like this on my Cal 28. The galley could be > placed elsewhere. > > Apart from the cost, are there any other drawbacks to placing the > galley near the companionway? I see the new Cal 2-28 has such a > layout. With the raised deck, the interior of the Cal 28 would be > huge if reconfigured like the Cal 40 interior. > > > > > > -- > Robert Bruce Stirling, II, Esq. > 602.254.6638 > 602.460.5631 [Cell] > 602-507-9445 [Fax] > 520-302-5206 [Tucson] > br… [at] stirlinglaw.com > http://www.stirlinglaw.com/lawyers > > The information in this e-mail communication is Privileged and > Confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact > the undersigned sender immediately and then delete this e-mail. > >

the CAL 3-29 was build this way as well as the later models of the CAL 2-27 (3-27?) were build with the galley across the rear bulkhead. Survey pictures of BayBreeze show the layout with the double conversion bunk spread out in the main salon. A nice feature when needed. Its this configuration that makes the 29 totally liveable. There should be no structural issues with moving the galley from the starboard side to aft as its all tacked on to the inner pan. http://picasaweb.google.ca/chris.herrnberger/RockHall#

I see I meant the "other" port side. That's pretty bad. I am under a lot of stress. On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:01 AM, chris123 <ch… [at] gmail.com>wrote: > > > the CAL 3-29 was build this way as well as the later models of the CAL 2-27 > (3-27?) were build with the galley across the rear bulkhead. Survey > pictures of BayBreeze show the layout with the double conversion bunk spread > out in the main salon. A nice feature when needed. Its this configuration > that makes the 29 totally liveable. There should be no structural issues > with moving the galley from the starboard side to aft as its all tacked on > to the inner pan. > > http://picasaweb.google.ca/chris.herrnberger/RockHall# > > -- Robert Bruce Stirling, II, Esq. 602.254.6638 602.460.5631 [Cell] 602-507-9445 [Fax] 520-302-5206 [Tucson] br… [at] stirlinglaw.com http://www.stirlinglaw.com/lawyers The information in this e-mail communication is Privileged and Confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the undersigned sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.

Not to worry, almost time to go sailing..:) Best regards.....back to work /ch