Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
We report sail area two ways. Our SA (reported) is just that… what the builder reports. In this case, Hanse’s reported SA included the 140% overlapping genoa.
You are referring to the 100% fore triangle area based on rig measurements. When we have that information, we report is as S.A. Total (100% Fore + Main Triangles).
When we first created the record for the 315 (2006) we did not have the rig measurements. When we saw your post we went looking a bit and found them which have now been added to the record.
Hope this helps.
Sorry, we are not familiar with the Islander 17. Any chance what you have is an Islands 17? If so, we suggest you reach out to Ralph Harvey, harveyralph@gmail.com, we do not know him but it looks like he owned one and did a lot of work on it. https://www.rvharvey.com/sumner_islands.htm.
Maybe he can help you?
We don’t have a great photo but we’re thinking it’s a NEPTUNE 14 (NOT NAUTILUS) from American Fiberglass. https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/neptune-14/
Thanks for sending the specs (both files look the same to us). We’ve added the new Beneteau First 30 to our database. Until we reindex our search, you can find it here: https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/first-30-beneteau-s-manuard/.
Or in Builders: Beneteau or Designers: Samuel ManuardThanks for sending the information on the Nautic W30. We have created a new record you can find here: https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/nautic-w30/
It occasionally happens where two boats built from the same design and pulled from the same mold have differing data. The reason could be the builder uses a different technique or makes some other material change. This is one reason why we report what the builder reports, even if it doesn’t seem right.
In this case, we have a copy of a Tashiba brochure which reports a ballast of 10,000 lbs. So, could Ta Shing have used 2,000 less ballast vs. the Baba or Panda? Maybe. It doesn’t seem likely but that’s what they published in their brochure. Who are we to argue?
I’m not sure why that’s happening. I tried myself for a number of different links, including both https and http (not secure)…
https://www.rightboat.com/boats-for-sale/jaguar/22/rb608455
https://topsail.co.uk/product/2233/#:~:text=Both%20sails%20in%20need%20of,2%20x%208ft%20oars
http://www.twentynine.caEverything seems okay.
Hi Jamie,
Interesting project. If you are looking for accuracy, it is not realistic to cover 520 nm in two days in a small sailboat unless you are you open to using a catamaran. The reason is, that would require sailing an average of about 11 kts/hour. Monohull keelboats have what’s called a “hull speed.” They cannot sail (or motor) through the water faster than approx. 1.34 x √LWL (in feet). Translated, a monohull would need a waterline of almost 70 feet to sail that fast.
With perfect conditions, wind strong enough to keep the boat at hull speed the entire time, without factoring in current, a monohull with a 30 ft waterline could cover the distance in about 3 days. So that would be your minimum time on a boat about 35 – 40′ length overall. Factoring in an adverse current and four days is probably more realistic.
There are a number of excellent Nordic builders (which would probably make the most sense). Including Arcona, FinnFlyer, FinnGulf. CR Yachts, Linjett, Malo, Marin, Maxi, Najad, NautorSwan, Ohlson, Sweden Yachts, X-yachts… I’m sure there are more.
Hope this helps.
Thanks Doug. Makes sense. Digging a bit we found the RI plant closed in November 1985, leaving only the Niagra-On-The-Lake plant building C&C’s.
Would you be willing to share your HIN? That will tell us definitively when your boat was manufactured.Hi Brad, from what we have found, the LOA, including overhangs, is 49′ 6″. The hull is 48′ 5″. We’ve attached a pic from the relevant page of the Beneteau 49 brochure.
Hi Marty,
Thanks for the heads-up about the Cyber 4800. We’ve added a record for the boat. It can be found here: https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/cyber-4800/
Best,
Bruce
