[Rhodes22-list] New Design BR

Fri Feb 10 07:44:02 EST 2006

Dave,
Thanks.  Ripstop should be very adequate for side panels.  If weather becomes heavy, there are other remedies to add. BTW, a longer fore and aft frame dimension is not a problem, just smart to ask if it is really needed.
Art

-----Original Message-----
>From: David Bradley <dwbrad at gmail.com>
>Sent: Feb 9, 2006 10:51 PM
>To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] New Design BR
>
>Art, you make some good points.
>
>Stan's belief was that the waterproof spray is readily accessible.  Other
>than that, I won't try to speak for Stan -- having already relayed his
>thoughts based on one discussion with him in Edenton.  I think his bigger
>challenge is the frame design anyway.
>
>It does seem like we should look at a Sunbrella roof panel in comparison to
>Dacron.  Have you ever compared prices?  And it is true, isn't it, that
>where Dacron comes in frequent contact with a hard surface it creates a weak
>point in the fabric?  As in sails on spreaders?
>
>The side panels should probably be lighter and could get by with less water
>resistance (other than the rear panel) -- what would you use for the sides?
>Have you compared sailcloth to ripstop nylon?  Would you consider Sunbrella
>on the sides?
>
>I agree totally that a few bucks more for durability and reliability are
>well worth it.
>
>Bill E., do you think we're ready to zero in on a prototype spec?
>
>Dave B.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 2/9/06, Arthur H. Czerwonky <czerwonky at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> Dave,
>>
>> You are patient, and thanks for your reply.  A few questions you may be
>> able to answer...
>>
>> What type and weight of sailcloth would be best suitable for this
>> application?  Sails are made without a concern or need for water resistance,
>> in fact are not water resistant.  The lighter cloth is less able in this
>> type of use and the heavier is harder to manage, store, and less flexible
>> (more difficult to install/uninstall).  Vendors of sailcloth I have spoken
>> with vis-a-vis a cockpit cover have told me they would clearly prefer
>> sunbrella versus sailcloth for rain protection.  I would not want to
>> discover that I need to apply treatment to my cover while in the midst of a
>> heavy downpour in the middle of the night.  I have seen some nasty
>> unexpected storms like this.  What is the treatment, and how available is it
>> to the public?
>>
>> Sailcloth is vulnerable to UV deterioration, the vendors tell me that in a
>> stretched configuration (to prevent pooling or weeping) the UV exposed cloth
>> would become fragile in about a year, more prone to rip and more often in
>> need of replacement.  As a user I am concerned about durability.
>>
>> I am searching for the most nearly 'bulletproof' option, and can't see the
>> value of a few bucks, or a few ounces, per yard saved if it results in an
>> obvious compromise of any type.  Does that make sense to you?
>>
>> Art
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: David Bradley <dwbrad at gmail.com>
>> >Sent: Feb 9, 2006 7:35 AM
>> >To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] New Design BR
>> >
>> >Art, if I recall the discussion correctly, Stan's main reasons for
>> favoring
>> >Dacron sail cloth over Sunbrella were lower weight and lower expense.  He
>> >felt that spraying the material to be waterproof is not a big deal.
>> >
>> >Dave B.
>> >
>> >
>> >On 2/8/06, Arthur H. Czerwonky <czerwonky at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Wally,
>> >> True, I understand 5 year timeframe, I would likely then replace.  Do
>> you
>> >> think sailcloth would not need treatment before this.  I am curious
>> why,
>> >> except maybe cost, could Sunbrella be less attractive?  Thanks for your
>> >> input, as I may try sailcloth if that good an option.
>> >> Art
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >From: TN Rhodey <tnrhodey at hotmail.com>
>> >> >Sent: Feb 8, 2006 11:55 AM
>> >> >To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
>> >> >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] New Design BR
>> >> >
>> >> >Art,
>> >> >
>> >> >Sunbrella is a great product but it also has to be treated as it ages.
>> >> >
>> >> >Wally
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>From: "Arthur H. Czerwonky" <czerwonky at earthlink.net>
>> >> >>Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> >> >>To: The Rhodes 22 mail list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> >> >>Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] New Design BR
>> >> >>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:17:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Slim,
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Like you say, different strokes for different folks.  If someone
>> prefers
>> >> to
>> >> >>wrap the mast and carry the BR all the way forward, why not.  From my
>> >> >>perspective the result doesn't provide any benefit (topping the cabin
>> >> roof)
>> >> >>and provides mobility problems and setup/takedown problems.  Further,
>> I
>> >> am
>> >> >>still not comfortable with a top fabric that needs to be
>> treated.  Make
>> >> the
>> >> >>top white sunbrella, spend precious few bucks more, and not have to
>> >> worry
>> >> >>about putting treatment on the fabric.  Anyone who doubts, watch how
>> >> water
>> >> >>behaves on Sunbrella.  That is why it is the industry standard.  I am
>> >> >>really not sure the sailcloth is that inexpensive.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Another thought - Why do we have to have a cookie cutter product?  It
>> is
>> >> no
>> >> >>more expensive to make it custom than to make it universal in my
>> >> view.  If
>> >> >>it needs to be $1K a copy, let's answer the challenge.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Art
>> >> >>
>> >> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >> >> >From: Slim <salm at mn.rr.com>
>> >> >> >Sent: Feb 7, 2006 1:49 AM
>> >> >> >To: Rhodes22-list <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> >> >> >Subject: [Rhodes22-list] New Design BR
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >OK, look, there's one thing that all agree upon--the pop top
>> enclosure
>> >> is
>> >> >> >too good to be true.  I could go on and on about how easy it is to
>> set
>> >> up
>> >> >> >and take down; doesn't require any frame; you can motor and/or sail
>> >> with
>> >> >>it
>> >> >> >up; provides standing head room under cover; has roll-up storm
>> >> >>flaps/screen
>> >> >> >windows; easily stowable; is the first defense against the weather;
>> >> >>already
>> >> >> >beautifully engineered and available for about a grand.  What could
>> be
>> >> >> >better?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Then comes the cockpit extension.  The cockpit room extension of
>> the
>> >> PTE.
>> >> >> >In my opinion, everyone who is interested in expanding the use of
>> >> their
>> >> >>boat
>> >> >> >should have the PTE first.  Period.  Then why should the boom room
>> >> make
>> >> >>the
>> >> >> >already-perfect PTE obsolete?  Why not integrate?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >My guess would be that Stan wants to offer an either/or type of
>> option
>> >> so
>> >> >> >you could either spend a grand on the PTE or spend a grand on the
>> Boom
>> >> >> >Room--your choice--but you won't have to spend two grand to enclose
>> >> the
>> >> >> >cockpit.  You could spend one grand for a stand-alone BR like
>> >> mine.  But
>> >> >> >since nobody DOESN'T want the PTE, or already has one, why not go
>> from
>> >> >> >there?  Sort of a step one and step two enclosure system.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >The two inherent problems with my boom room are the issue with the
>> >> >>shrouds
>> >> >> >and access to the bow.  Stan seems to be sticking to that design.
>> >> Art's
>> >> >> >design lacks those flaws.  So does Roger's.  Let's put the best
>> >> feature
>> >> >>of
>> >> >> >each of them together and get rid of the problems.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >It wouldn't take more than a couple zippers and some velcro to
>> >> integrate
>> >> >>a
>> >> >> >boom tent to the PTE and make it splendid.  OK, so you have to
>> spend
>> >> two
>> >> >> >grand for the whole thing.  Anybody complaining?  In theory, I
>> >> wouldn't
>> >> >> >hesitate to sell my stand-alone BR for what I've got in it ($500)
>> and
>> >> >>turn
>> >> >> >around and spend a G on something else that's new and
>> >> perfect.  Something
>> >> >> >that can be set up by two drunk chicks in the dark!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Slim
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >__________________________________________________
>> >> >> >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> >> >>
>> >> >>__________________________________________________
>> >> >>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >__________________________________________________
>> >> >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> >>
>> >> __________________________________________________
>> >> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >David Bradley
>> >203.253.9973
>> >dwbrad at gmail.com
>> >__________________________________________________
>> >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>
>
>
>--
>David Bradley
>203.253.9973
>dwbrad at gmail.com
>__________________________________________________
>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list