[Rhodes22-list] Sail Inventory

[David Culp]

Wally:

I may solve my issues by being able to sheet in when the wind is up.  I
don't have the cabin-side track or block so am basically
stuck with the sheets outside the shrouds.  Don't go to a lot of trouble
measuring-I think the "J" measurement is 8.8, so I can
figure out percentage by the foot length I'm using at any given time.  US
Sailing has a calculator on their website.
I have noted the lengths to certain parts of the rigging, so that I can
estimate how far out the sail is extended.
For instance, I think the approximate foot length is about 11' for a 125,
13.5' for 155 and fully unfurled is 16 for the 175.
This is not precise, but close enough for my purposes.

Thanks,
David

Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 14:04:57 -0400
From: "TN Rhodey" <tnrhodey at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Sail Inventory
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Message-ID:
       <ebee322a0705291104n3274c927l55bffbee5346ffb1 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

David,

I was a little lucky when i found my boat. It was an 84 and needed a little
TLC but it had a brand new IMF main and brand new 125. The original IMF and
155 were pretty ragged, Both new sails were from Quantum and are very well
made. I bet you could contact Quantum for measurements and pricing. Quantum
is not cheap so you could probably do much better on price.. They do make a
nice sail. If  I am out on the boat (and it is not 90) degrees I will take
some measurements. Also I am not saying to give up on the 175......if my
boat came with a 175 I would most likely fly it untill blown out. I do know
I would replace with 155.... for my conditions it works best.

My boat came with a Harken Furler that allows easy sail changes. It also
alows for tensioning of the halyard. If desired you could fly two headsails
like Peter discussed. I have only done this once and it was pretty
interesting but I am usually solo so this is not the norm.

As you mentioned pay attention to your local conditions for a while....ift
may turn out the big sail is the way to go....or not.

Wally


On 5/26/07, David Culp <daculp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wally:
>
> Thank you, this is great information and helps me a lot in determining
> that
> if I do decide, how big to go.  I want
> something that I can sail with fully unfurled most of the time and only
> reef
> if I really, really have to.
>
> In summer around here, there is either not much wind so the 175 is too
> heavy
> or it's 20 mph or better and it just seems like too much and I end up
> rolling it up some.  The 125 might be the one to get for when the wind is
> up.  Seems like I have the 175 rolled up a lot of times to the spreaders
> so
> I can stay flatter and tack it easier.  A lot of times, I won't catch
> subtle
> changes in the wind until the sail luffs.  I miss not having some
> tale-tells
> to give me some clues earlier.
>
> I am not giving up on the big sail though, because some days it works
> great,
> unfortunately I don't see many of those days.
>
> Question:  What type of furler do you have and does it allow changing
> sails?  My boat has the factory original which I like because it is simple
> and solid but would require stepping the mast and changing the sails.  I
> want to be able to choose which sail to use at the slip before I go
> out.  On
> days where
> the 175 will work well, I'll go with it.  Wind is up and gusty (happens a
> lot in Texas) probably would get the 125 up if I'm alone.  Like Rummy
> said,
> there is no use
> having sails underfoot and with no crew to help, I don't see many sail
> changes happening on the water.
>
> Question:  Do you happen to know the dimensions of your 125?  I'm guessing
> the foot would be somewhere around 11 feet.
>
> I left you off my list of "go to" people in an earlier post in oversight,
> but you should have been on it as well because your information is always
> on point and helpful as well.  Thanks again.
>
> David
>
> Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 13:37:59 -0400
> From: "TN Rhodey" <tnrhodey at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Rummy is right, but I may still need a
>       110
> To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> Message-ID:
>       <ebee322a0705251037o416f3302rff210e89ddac02e7 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> David,
>
> Once your start furling any sail the shape and performance is negatively
> effected. This is a fact. You can not furl the leading edge flat. Anyone
> who
> tells you a partially furled sails does not have a negative effect on sail
> shape is in denial. A 175 furled down to 125 is going to have pretty poor
> shape regardless of vendor. Ask the vendor and they will tell you the same
> thing (if they are honest). Yes you can make adjustments to limit the
> problem but facts are facts. A 155 furled to 125 will pull better than a
> 175
> furled to 125. A 155 at 135 will pull better than a 175 furled to
> 135......So up to conditions that call for 155 or less the 155 will be the
> best sail.
>
> Now is a 175 furled to 160 better than a 155? Maybe.....maybe not. This
> may
> depend more on point of sail than anything else. Some say the 175
> maximizes
> potenital but in my eyes it is the wrong sail more often than it is the
> right one. It does seem to me that those that like the 175 sail have never
> tried anything different and typically don't race their boat.
>
> I don't have a 110 (or a 175) but if you really want a smaller sail for
> heavy weather I would consider the 125 or 135. I have a 155 and a 125. The
> 125 is the max size that can fit fully unfurled inside the shrouds. It
> comes
> just short of hitting spreaders. This furls down to about a 110 and still
> holds shape ok. I have flown a friends sail that looked to me like it
> would
> be close to a 165/175. Great sail off the wind in steady light/med
> winds... but really was too heavy for light winds and too much sail for
> heavy winds. Many others on this list have complained about the 175 in
> very
> light winds....too heavy and will not hold shape. Another common complaint
> with 175 is lee helm.
>
> It really depends on your own preference and sailing conditions.
>
> Fair Winds,
>
> Wally
>
>
>
>
> On 5/24/07, David Culp <daculp at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Rummy:
> >
> > No doubt the 175 maximizes the potential of the boat design and
> therefore
> > is
> > the correct sail for the boat for the majority of owners.  On my narrow,
> > long and winding lake with its fickle winds, I very rarely get to enjoy
> it
> > fully unfurled for long periods.  It has happened on a few days and it
> was
> > great.  When I can get a steady enough wind to keep it filled but not so
> > strong as to require reducing its size I have been impressed with
> > performance and have learned to tack it fairly well.  The terrain around
> > here also causes many wind direction changes and the result is almost
> > constant sail trimming.  You can be drifting one minute in 6 kts, and
> then
> > around the next bend be reefing in 20.  This is not a sailing lake, at
> > least
> > not for boats with big gennies or spinnakers.  In fact, in 5 years I
> have
> > only seen one spinnaker flown and it was me flying it from a friend's
> > Flying
> > Scot.
> >
> > You're right, I for one, admit that I do not know how to use the 175
> > properly and if I ever want to really learn how, I am going to have to
> > trailer to a better locale where I can get on some steady runs and
> > experiment with it.   This year is my second season and I am really
> > working
> > the traveler a lot more and that has been a help with it.  I am going to
> > get
> > a pole and attach it to the shrouds as you suggest.  This will help me
> > greatly on light wind days to keep the sail presented properly to the
> > wind.
> > In moderate winds, I usually have no problems wing and wing.
> >
> > It might be better for me in my locale to change out the furler to the
> CDI
> > which allows sail changes because I would not want to give up having the
> > 175
> > for those special days.  I'm guessing a 110 would be the most useful and
> > also guessing that it would furl out to just past the upper shroud area.
> > Anyone have a 110 and can tell me where the clew extends to when fully
> > unfurled?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 07:46:08 EDT
> > From: R22RumRunner at aol.com
> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Genoa size and usage
> > To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
> > Message-ID: <d36.8802f0d.3386d500 at aol.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> >
> > David,
> > Instead of attaching the whisker pole to the special eye on the front of
> > the
> > mast, try attaching it to the shrouds. Going forward to attach and push
> > out
> > a whisker pole requires crew on board. You can attach to one of the
> > shrouds
> > without going forward and I do it all the time single handing.
> > I was out sailing with another R22 skipper this past Sunday and he
> > couldn't
> > believe how simple it was. He thought the only place you could attach it
> > was
> > on  the front of the mast, Duh!
> > I have allowed a lot of discussion of the 175 to slide by the past
> couple
> > of
> > weeks, but this is coming to a screeching halt.
> > The 175 is the best sail for the R22. It provides all the power on this
> > boat. Furling my 175 does not ruin the sail shape. I have the same Lee
> > sail
> > that
> > came with the boat in 1988. Perhaps the Doyle sails have lousy shape
> when
> > furled, but mine does not. The 175 gives you so many advantages,
> > especially
> > in
> > light air conditions. In heavy air, it can give you a rush you have
> never
> > experienced. Unless you have the CDI furler and can change your sails,
> the
> > 175  is
> > the route to go. If you don't think so, then you simply don't know your
> > boat
> > or how to use the sail properly and would be better off with a smaller
> > sail.
> >
> > Rummy said that.
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>