Pulling the Trigger on the Offshore Columbia 32
#1
Posted 12 January 2011 - 07:22 PM
Our older Columbia (Uncontrollable Urge) has seen many upgrades over the years and in over 16K racing miles (in sometimes hairy conditions) has never let us down- but it demands some compromises for offshore racing that has limited it's potential.
Vince from Columbia Yachts approached us last year after our strong finish in the Pacific Cup with a very tantalizing offer: leverage the best of the older Columbia, by designing a new boat with no compromises for offshore work: it would be substantially lighter and stiffer via carbon fiber, have a 7/8 hoist to give 17% more sail area, external sprit, retractable keel (allows for trailer delivery on cargo containers), 15hp Yanmar diesel with retractable prop drive, redesigned companionway and hatch (based on experiences with the Pogo), repositioned forward hatch, etc...and a minimal no-nonsense offshore interior with dedicated nav station.
The catch- a super aggressive price of $99K. We did what any sane person would do...and said "Hell Yes."
So the money was delivered yesterday and the build started- but there is still room for mods, particularly on the interior set-up.
We will post build updates to the forum and look forward to substantive input. Or tits.
And if any of you want to jump on and get your offshore mojo going in your area take a serious look- it is a lot more fun to race against similar boats!
JungleJim
Uncontrollable Urge
USA 56603
#2
Posted 12 January 2011 - 07:28 PM
#3
Posted 12 January 2011 - 07:36 PM
#4
Posted 12 January 2011 - 08:00 PM
When's delivery?
#6
Posted 12 January 2011 - 10:18 PM
#7
Posted 13 January 2011 - 12:17 AM
#8
Posted 13 January 2011 - 04:27 AM
ditto when is she done?
#9
Posted 13 January 2011 - 04:45 AM
#10
Posted 13 January 2011 - 01:23 PM
#11
Posted 13 January 2011 - 01:45 PM
Just curious how aggressive the price is and how much more you think to get it race ready.
#12
Posted 13 January 2011 - 02:42 PM
$99K gets you how far? boat/motor/keel/rig? electronics? sails? trailer??
Just curious how aggressive the price is and how much more you think to get it race ready.
With the initial press release, the expectation mentioned $150k race prepped for Trans Pac and returned from Hawaii. The Ulman link also notes a $10k credit if order and deposit by the 15th--IMO, sounds pretty aggressive.
#13
Posted 13 January 2011 - 02:56 PM
#14
Posted 13 January 2011 - 03:09 PM
$99K gets you how far? boat/motor/keel/rig? electronics? sails? trailer??
Just curious how aggressive the price is and how much more you think to get it race ready.
With the initial press release, the expectation mentioned $150k race prepped for Trans Pac and returned from Hawaii. The Ulman link also notes a $10k credit if order and deposit by the 15th--IMO, sounds pretty aggressive.
Seems to me that's a damn good price for a carbon, offshore capable boat. Congrats on the new boat JJ, keep us updated as things progress.
#15
Posted 13 January 2011 - 03:15 PM
#16
Posted 13 January 2011 - 03:17 PM
Looking very forward to seeing it on the water.
#17
Posted 13 January 2011 - 04:15 PM
#18
Posted 13 January 2011 - 07:05 PM
#19
Posted 13 January 2011 - 07:15 PM
#20
Posted 13 January 2011 - 07:53 PM
The lead-in mentioned a "dedicated nav station". Much of our nav work is GPS and Laptop. I know you also need back up plans, sightings and reductions. Are you sizing that nav area for the back-up (chart size table) or will you keep the nav station small and revert to the saloon table in the event you need to go to sextant, charts and position tables. With better and cheaper electronics and back-up systems, a nav station is almost retro.
totally agree. Nav stations are so last century.
#21
Posted 13 January 2011 - 08:05 PM
Sweet. How does the prop retract?
Pics and/or video!!
#22
Posted 13 January 2011 - 08:37 PM
#23
Posted 13 January 2011 - 11:08 PM
The lead-in mentioned a "dedicated nav station". Much of our nav work is GPS and Laptop. I know you also need back up plans, sightings and reductions. Are you sizing that nav area for the back-up (chart size table) or will you keep the nav station small and revert to the saloon table in the event you need to go to sextant, charts and position tables. With better and cheaper electronics and back-up systems, a nav station is almost retro.
totally agree. Nav stations are so last century.
There may be a place for a nav station, but on a 32, racing to a known destination, much of the nav and planning is done ahead of time. Comfortable places to rest off-watch on the windward (or leeward) is more important every hour than re-plotting a position on paper that 2 or three or four handhelds on deck already have. Cruising or much bigger boats , (you could make thearguement)can afford to dedicate some single purpose space.
#24
Posted 13 January 2011 - 11:59 PM
#25
Posted 14 January 2011 - 01:49 AM
#26
Posted 14 January 2011 - 02:29 AM
Sticker Schock
Urge
#27
Posted 14 January 2011 - 02:46 AM
While the Nav station positioned at the foot of the helm on a big-boat is pretty cool, on smaller boats is always seems to get placed adjacent to the main hatch and frequently get innundated - be it a forgotten-to-close the the slider, wet-sail transit, or rain/sneaker waves - while communicating to the deck sounds good, keeping the electronics in a nice dry place is an idea whose time has come.
So you guys trading in the old whip or is somebody getting a hand-me-down ?
Wish I were ordering C32 # 2.
#28
Posted 14 January 2011 - 02:58 AM
#29
Posted 14 January 2011 - 03:15 AM
Yea, the nav station on the Shark sucked! How are ya my brother!Ho-mo-to...I can dig it.
While the Nav station positioned at the foot of the helm on a big-boat is pretty cool, on smaller boats is always seems to get placed adjacent to the main hatch and frequently get innundated - be it a forgotten-to-close the the slider, wet-sail transit, or rain/sneaker waves - while communicating to the deck sounds good, keeping the electronics in a nice dry place is an idea whose time has come.
So you guys trading in the old whip or is somebody getting a hand-me-down ?
Wish I were ordering C32 # 2.
#30
Posted 14 January 2011 - 03:29 AM
You just need a dry place for the laptop and place to sit.
The lead-in mentioned a "dedicated nav station". Much of our nav work is GPS and Laptop. I know you also need back up plans, sightings and reductions. Are you sizing that nav area for the back-up (chart size table) or will you keep the nav station small and revert to the saloon table in the event you need to go to sextant, charts and position tables. With better and cheaper electronics and back-up systems, a nav station is almost retro.
totally agree. Nav stations are so last century.
There may be a place for a nav station, but on a 32, racing to a known destination, much of the nav and planning is done ahead of time. Comfortable places to rest off-watch on the windward (or leeward) is more important every hour than re-plotting a position on paper that 2 or three or four handhelds on deck already have. Cruising or much bigger boats , (you could make thearguement)can afford to dedicate some single purpose space.
#31
Posted 14 January 2011 - 03:30 AM
#32
Posted 14 January 2011 - 03:35 AM
There may be a place for a nav station, but on a 32, racing to a known destination, much of the nav and planning is done ahead of time. Comfortable places to rest off-watch on the windward (or leeward) is more important every hour than re-plotting a position on paper that 2 or three or four handhelds on deck already have. Cruising or much bigger boats , (you could make thearguement)can afford to dedicate some single purpose space.
totally agree. Nav stations are so last century.
The lead-in mentioned a "dedicated nav station". Much of our nav work is GPS and Laptop. I know you also need back up plans, sightings and reductions. Are you sizing that nav area for the back-up (chart size table) or will you keep the nav station small and revert to the saloon table in the event you need to go to sextant, charts and position tables. With better and cheaper electronics and back-up systems, a nav station is almost retro.
Not so retro, methinks.
#33
Posted 14 January 2011 - 04:20 AM
#34
Posted 14 January 2011 - 06:16 AM
Why a 15hp engine when the original only had a 10hp? With the offshore 32 being about 500 lbs lighter, I wouldn't think that you want or need the extra weight of a bigger engine.
My understanding is that the 10hp single cylinder 1GM10 engine was discontinued and the 2YM15 is the smallest currently available.
Can anyone confirm this?
- HappyG
#35
Posted 14 January 2011 - 06:32 AM
The lead-in mentioned a "dedicated nav station". Much of our nav work is GPS and Laptop. I know you also need back up plans, sightings and reductions. Are you sizing that nav area for the back-up (chart size table) or will you keep the nav station small and revert to the saloon table in the event you need to go to sextant, charts and position tables. With better and cheaper electronics and back-up systems, a nav station is almost retro.
totally agree. Nav stations are so last century.
There may be a place for a nav station, but on a 32, racing to a known destination, much of the nav and planning is done ahead of time. Comfortable places to rest off-watch on the windward (or leeward) is more important every hour than re-plotting a position on paper that 2 or three or four handhelds on deck already have. Cruising or much bigger boats , (you could make thearguement)can afford to dedicate some single purpose space.
I'm the primary navigator on Urge and as Tweaker mentioned, our current nav station is the settee with a laptop bolted to the bulkhead at a 90 degree angle to the seat. You've got to sit sideways on the settee do do any work.
For shorter coastal races of a day or two, I agree that you do much of the navigation ahead of time, but we've done 16,000 miles of ocean racing on Urge including 2 races to Hawaii. For those races, I spend at least an hour of every off watch on the laptop downloading gribs, analyzing weather, plotting the fleet, doing daily radio check-ins, etc.
One of the key design specs for a new boat was a dedicated nav station that is functional but designed for modern navigation - basically a chair with enough desk space for a laptop, sat phone, GPS, and radios. For paper charts, we'll use a hatch board.
Having said that, I completely agree with your assessment that a comfortable place to rest off-watch is also extremely important. I wouldn't sacrifice that for a fancy nav station.
- HappyG
#36
Posted 14 January 2011 - 02:22 PM
I would think either some foot braces or a seat belt would be appropriate for the head.
#37
Posted 14 January 2011 - 04:17 PM
You expect the tooling and the boat to be built by then? That is a daydream.
Any chance one is coming to Chicago for Strictly Sail at the end of the month?
IMHO, exhibiting Colombia 32C would be a waste of the advertising budget because Chicago area sailors have shown disinterest when it comes to purchasing this type and size of boat.
With so little opportunity to compete in long distance offshore races on Lake Michigan it would take decades to sail 16,000 miles. I bet that the longest sailing T-10s that were first introduced 32 years ago haven't goat that many miles under their keels.
Umm, no. But, boat builders have been known to borrow an owner's boat, like the one that just sailed to Hawaii, and use that as a marketing too at a boatshow. Columbia did this with the 30 at the Strictly Sail show a few years back.
I don't want this thread to get off-topic but your assessment of the boat's suitability for the Great Lakes is a bit off. Between the two Mac races you're looking at no less than 600 miles of what I will call medium-distance racing each year plus a few other point-to-point races (Queens Cup, Tri-State) that are shorter but still make for fun racing of no less than 60 miles each. The trailerability of the boat then allows it sail events like CRW before the season here really starts.
#38
Posted 14 January 2011 - 04:22 PM
#39
Posted 14 January 2011 - 04:36 PM
#40
Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:17 AM
#41
Posted 15 January 2011 - 03:30 AM
#42
Posted 15 January 2011 - 05:10 AM
#43
Posted 15 January 2011 - 06:42 AM
My understanding is the Offshore Columbia keel will lift higher to allow ramp-launching, but the keel will be 6" deeper than our current lumbo (total 7'6") and quite a bit heavier. Orca paint pattern will be mandatory. Just say "No" to sharks. Sail-plan has less roach and a lower boom so coupled with the deeper and heavier keel should have better righting moment and lower COE= less spin outs.
We really want seat-belts on the head to prevent airborne pinching, only a very small holding tank (probably bladder bag) that can be easily maintained, and a T-valve for dropping the kids offshore. Forward compartment should prevent water ingress into the rest of the boat from soggy spinnakers stuffed down the hatch or a broken head.
Some other thoughts- not sure if these will make it onto the production boat though...
Thinking of installing a small water vacuum pump as well- this makes mopping up much faster, keeps the boat from going thru puberty (lots of hair from four grown men) and can double as an emergency pump.
Small saltwater pump on the transom for rinsing out dishes.
Dedicated area close to the companionway for storing wet foulies and boots. Dry is good and reduces fatigue.
Small fans located near the hatches by the berths. Cool air is good in the tropics and reduces fatigue.
Galley just large enough to lay 8 slices of bread out. No oven. Vent over the stove. We use a pressure cooker and the added moisture in the air creates mucho condensation on the interior. Will probably use gas rather than alcohol- although Urge 1 was alcohol and we only had one stove fire.
Lots of discussion over instruments. Urge 1 is all TackTics but these are very difficult to see at night. Might try blue-toothing a tablet to the main nav computer- this would allow us to consult Expedition without dropping below.
Big discussions over water makers and their value with a four-person crew. We have run this calculation many times balancing weight with security with dependability. We currently run the engine to charge batteries twice per day at one hour per session and know that this uses very, very little fuel on the Yanmar 10hp.
JungleJim
Uncontrollable Urge
USA 56603
#44
Posted 15 January 2011 - 06:51 AM
#45
Posted 15 January 2011 - 03:05 PM
You are preaching to the quire since I really like this design. I believe that it will perform well in both venues.
I know the design spec is for an offshore-capable racer, but is there any reason to believe it wouldn't be good around the buoys too?
A few years back there was a two day on the water exposition of various sport boats in Chicago, and none of them were ever purchased and raced in Chicago area.
It appears that most Chicago area owners of 30-35' boats prefer to race their old shit boxes instead of boats similar to Columbia 32C.
Good point. People didn't buy Vipers, Open 5.7s or Ultimate 20s so the chances of them buying a 32 ft. 4-up offshore racer is minimal. Your logic is impressive.
#46
Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:21 PM
You are preaching to the quire since I really like this design. I believe that it will perform well in both venues.
I know the design spec is for an offshore-capable racer, but is there any reason to believe it wouldn't be good around the buoys too?
A few years back there was a two day on the water exposition of various sport boats in Chicago, and none of them were ever purchased and raced in Chicago area.
It appears that most Chicago area owners of 30-35' boats prefer to race their old shit boxes instead of boats similar to Columbia 32C.
Good point. People didn't buy Vipers, Open 5.7s or Ultimate 20s so the chances of them buying a 32 ft. 4-up offshore racer is minimal. Your logic is impressive.
Whether the logic is sound or not it is clear that Chicago doesn't have many progressive buyers of race boats. It is a mostly an assembly of old shitboxes and furniture laden cruisers. And you are fully aware of that.
#47
Posted 15 January 2011 - 05:58 PM
In addition, your stuborness in refusing to recognize that Chicago area has been unable to jump start any sport boat fleet regardless of size, speaks volumes about your logic.
Just in case you missed it, I really like this boat.
The best way to jump start any fleet in Chicago is for you to stay as far away as humanly possible George.
#48
Posted 15 January 2011 - 06:18 PM
How much do booms cost?
#49
Posted 10 March 2011 - 10:07 PM
My berth is getting rebuilt this spring and apparently will now hold a 32 footer!
Might be time to consider an upgrade from my Olson 30...
#50
Posted 10 March 2011 - 10:46 PM
#51
Posted 09 April 2011 - 01:07 AM
Attached Files
#52
Posted 09 April 2011 - 01:09 AM
Attached Files
#53
Posted 09 April 2011 - 02:50 AM
#54
Posted 09 April 2011 - 03:13 AM
#55
Posted 09 April 2011 - 03:50 AM
Think it has carbon fiber?
Nice touch... subtly sexy.
#56
Posted 09 April 2011 - 05:52 PM
And can you get it with a retractable sprit?
#57
Posted 09 April 2011 - 06:05 PM
Think it has carbon fiber?
That's hot! Congrats.
#58
Posted 10 April 2011 - 06:29 AM
#59
Posted 11 April 2011 - 01:34 PM
Went up to the factory yesterday and the project is really coming together. Checked out the engine and began to see what the deck is going to look like: flat out sexy!
"You'll need 3/4 inch line to keep her from jumping off the dock". Vince Valdes
The boat is going to look fast even while at the slip. Aggressive profile, wide cockpit, good visibility while helming, with the goal of keeping dry, dry, dry inside.
I think the bro took some pics while we were up there...hull weighed in at 508lbs.
Discussion of pros and cons of a monsterish bowsprit ensuing. Will be pinned so that it can be pulled at the dock.
JungleJim
Uncontrollable Urge
56603
#60
Posted 11 April 2011 - 02:01 PM
#61
Posted 11 April 2011 - 02:16 PM
Sail safe!
#62
Posted 11 April 2011 - 03:47 PM
I think the bro took some pics while we were up there...hull weighed in at 508lbs.
That's nutty!
#63
Posted 12 April 2011 - 07:02 AM

I want one!
#64
Posted 12 April 2011 - 07:41 AM
Has anyone pondered a trial IRC rating for this little beast? Would be very keen to hear...
#65
Posted 12 April 2011 - 03:16 PM
#66
Posted 12 April 2011 - 03:29 PM
Short answer #1: Their web designer made it too hard to add new pages.Just visited Kernan's design site...anyone know why this yacht isn't mentioned anywhere in there?
Short answer #2: The site has sort of been orphaned. See #1.
Also missing: Dr. Laura's Katana.
#67
Posted 12 April 2011 - 04:56 PM
With the New Year comes a commitment to a new boat- The Offshore Columbia 32! The bro and crew of Urge has rallied and determined that we go faster, harder and farther. We took a close look at the 40' options (particularly the J125) but decided that we had fun keeping together a small crew of close friends and of course it is much nicer on the pocketbook.
Our older Columbia (Uncontrollable Urge) has seen many upgrades over the years and in over 16K racing miles (in sometimes hairy conditions) has never let us down- but it demands some compromises for offshore racing that has limited it's potential.
Vince from Columbia Yachts approached us last year after our strong finish in the Pacific Cup with a very tantalizing offer: leverage the best of the older Columbia, by designing a new boat with no compromises for offshore work: it would be substantially lighter and stiffer via carbon fiber, have a 7/8 hoist to give 17% more sail area, external sprit, retractable keel (allows for trailer delivery on cargo containers), 15hp Yanmar diesel with retractable prop drive, redesigned companionway and hatch (based on experiences with the Pogo), repositioned forward hatch, etc...and a minimal no-nonsense offshore interior with dedicated nav station.
The catch- a super aggressive price of $99K. We did what any sane person would do...and said "Hell Yes."
So the money was delivered yesterday and the build started- but there is still room for mods, particularly on the interior set-up.
We will post build updates to the forum and look forward to substantive input. Or tits.
And if any of you want to jump on and get your offshore mojo going in your area take a serious look- it is a lot more fun to race against similar boats!
JungleJim
Uncontrollable Urge
USA 56603
Congrats on the upgrade from U2
#68
Posted 12 April 2011 - 09:03 PM
It is nice to see a new design that is not slab sided,The boat is going to look fast even while at the slip. Aggressive profile,
and looks like the designer may have had a ships curve
rather than just a straight edge.
#69
Posted 12 April 2011 - 11:17 PM
Sexy new photo just came in the mail...
I want one!
#70
Posted 12 April 2011 - 11:22 PM
UU1?
#71
Posted 12 April 2011 - 11:38 PM
#72
Posted 13 April 2011 - 02:27 AM
Poor mans' Farr 11S....so to speak.
Um, not even close. Two completely different types of boat:
11s is a day racer for around the cans/coastal racing - Columbia is optimized for offshore.
11s is a 37 foot, 5,300lb boat - Columbia is 32 feet and ~3,600lbs.
11s has as bunch of go fast features (canting keel, daggerboards, etc.) - Columbia is a much more conventional set-up aimed at small crews.
Could go on...
#73
Posted 13 April 2011 - 02:32 AM
Yep.
Poor mans' Farr 11S....so to speak.
Um, not even close. Two completely different types of boat:
11s is a 37 foot, 5,300lb boat - Columbia is 32 feet and ~3,600lbs.
11s is a day racer for around the cans/coastal racing - Columbia is optimized for offshore .
11s has as bunch of go fast features (canting keel, daggerboards, etc.) - Columbia is a much more conventional set-up aimed at small crews.
Could go on...
Same, same, but nothing fucking like each other.
#74
Posted 13 April 2011 - 02:44 AM
It is nice to see a new design that is not slab sided
It's the compound curve that makes it art.
#75
Posted 13 April 2011 - 08:32 AM
Poor mans' Farr 11S....so to speak.
Um, not even close. Two completely different types of boat:
11s is a day racer for around the cans/coastal racing - Columbia is optimized for offshore.
11s is a 37 foot, 5,300lb boat - Columbia is 32 feet and ~3,600lbs.
11s has as bunch of go fast features (canting keel, daggerboards, etc.) - Columbia is a much more conventional set-up aimed at small crews.
Could go on...
Oh ya...agree on all counts...and let's not forget, the 11s can't point and only sails to its rating (talking IRC here) at 150 TWA in >15 kts TWS or thereabouts (i.e. excellent OD yacht but lousy handicapped/fleet racer). One of them has raced in quite a few regattas in Asia over the past couple of years (with guys who know what they're doing) and it never hit the podium.
The C32, on the otherhand - because of its super light displacement - might just be a light air weapon in the making. I'd just be a little worried about being handcuffed to asym-only in light air though (against other yachts with poles/symmetric kites...like Mumm30 or other strong light air boat).
I am genuinely intruiged by this yacht though (the C32). And since selling our TP52 I've been looking for something alot smaller and super fast to have some fun with. Call a couple of mates, chuck some sails on board and go!
It just says go fast to me.
Couple of questions:
1) Has anyone got the polars for this boat? If yes - please PM me to share. Thanks.
2) Has anyone done a trial IRC certificate yet? If not, I will do it but I need all the sail measurements. Mr Ullman???
Would love to explore this yacht's potential beyond just short-handed offshore racing if anyone else is interested.
Its too damn sexy to ignore!
#76
Posted 13 April 2011 - 08:49 AM
Poor mans' Farr 11S....so to speak.
Um, not even close. Two completely different types of boat:
11s is a day racer for around the cans/coastal racing - Columbia is optimized for offshore.
11s is a 37 foot, 5,300lb boat - Columbia is 32 feet and ~3,600lbs.
11s has as bunch of go fast features (canting keel, daggerboards, etc.) - Columbia is a much more conventional set-up aimed at small crews.
Could go on...
Oh ya...agree on all counts...and let's not forget, the 11s can't point and only sails to its rating (talking IRC here) at 150 TWA in >15 kts TWS or thereabouts (i.e. excellent OD yacht but lousy handicapped/fleet racer). One of them has raced in quite a few regattas in Asia over the past couple of years (with guys who know what they're doing) and it never hit the podium.
The C32, on the otherhand - because of its super light displacement - might just be a light air weapon in the making. I'd just be a little worried about being handcuffed to asym-only in light air though (against other yachts with poles/symmetric kites...like Mumm30 or other strong light air boat).
I am genuinely intruiged by this yacht though (the C32). And since selling our TP52 I've been looking for something alot smaller and super fast to have some fun with. Call a couple of mates, chuck some sails on board and go!
It just says go fast to me.
Couple of questions:
1) Has anyone got the polars for this boat? If yes - please PM me to share. Thanks.
2) Has anyone done a trial IRC certificate yet? If not, I will do it but I need all the sail measurements. Mr Ullman???
Would love to explore this yacht's potential beyond just short-handed offshore racing if anyone else is interested.
Its too damn sexy to ignore!
You won't be alone Tuffy. Squall is ordering one and initially race it out of Ocean Marina to try and build up the class. Also for six months there are five regattas four hours drive away from Samui to Phuket. Way to go !
#77
Posted 13 April 2011 - 09:01 AM
Poor mans' Farr 11S....so to speak.
Um, not even close. Two completely different types of boat:
11s is a day racer for around the cans/coastal racing - Columbia is optimized for offshore.
11s is a 37 foot, 5,300lb boat - Columbia is 32 feet and ~3,600lbs.
11s has as bunch of go fast features (canting keel, daggerboards, etc.) - Columbia is a much more conventional set-up aimed at small crews.
Could go on...
Oh ya...agree on all counts...and let's not forget, the 11s can't point and only sails to its rating (talking IRC here) at 150 TWA in >15 kts TWS or thereabouts (i.e. excellent OD yacht but lousy handicapped/fleet racer). One of them has raced in quite a few regattas in Asia over the past couple of years (with guys who know what they're doing) and it never hit the podium.
The C32, on the otherhand - because of its super light displacement - might just be a light air weapon in the making. I'd just be a little worried about being handcuffed to asym-only in light air though (against other yachts with poles/symmetric kites...like Mumm30 or other strong light air boat).
I am genuinely intruiged by this yacht though (the C32). And since selling our TP52 I've been looking for something alot smaller and super fast to have some fun with. Call a couple of mates, chuck some sails on board and go!
It just says go fast to me.
Couple of questions:
1) Has anyone got the polars for this boat? If yes - please PM me to share. Thanks.
2) Has anyone done a trial IRC certificate yet? If not, I will do it but I need all the sail measurements. Mr Ullman???
Would love to explore this yacht's potential beyond just short-handed offshore racing if anyone else is interested.
Its too damn sexy to ignore!
You won't be alone Tuffy. Squall is ordering one and initially race it out of Ocean Marina to try and build up the class. Also for six months there are five regattas four hours drive away from Samui to Phuket. Way to go !
No kidding! Squally...as in owner of Tradewinds, Samui has ordered one?
#78
Posted 13 April 2011 - 10:06 AM
<<snip>>
The C32, on the otherhand - because of its super light displacement - might just be a light air weapon in the making. I'd just be a little worried about being handcuffed to asym-only in light air though (against other yachts with poles/symmetric kites...like Mumm30 or other strong light air boat).
I am genuinely intruiged by this yacht though (the C32). And since selling our TP52 I've been looking for something alot smaller and super fast to have some fun with. Call a couple of mates, chuck some sails on board and go!
It just says go fast to me.
Couple of questions:
1) Has anyone got the polars for this boat? If yes - please PM me to share. Thanks.
2) Has anyone done a trial IRC certificate yet? If not, I will do it but I need all the sail measurements. Mr Ullman???
Would love to explore this yacht's potential beyond just short-handed offshore racing if anyone else is interested.
Its too damn sexy to ignore!
+1
This would be the sweet spot for a little offshore weapon; by comparison an A35 tips the scales at 4450kgs vs 1580 for the C32
The question is how badly the carbon hull is hammered under IRC.
This would be a fun little ride to Vietnam....
Does the LOA hit the 10m for offshores around here?
#79
Posted 13 April 2011 - 10:24 AM
<<snip>>
The C32, on the otherhand - because of its super light displacement - might just be a light air weapon in the making. I'd just be a little worried about being handcuffed to asym-only in light air though (against other yachts with poles/symmetric kites...like Mumm30 or other strong light air boat).
I am genuinely intruiged by this yacht though (the C32). And since selling our TP52 I've been looking for something alot smaller and super fast to have some fun with. Call a couple of mates, chuck some sails on board and go!
It just says go fast to me.
Couple of questions:
1) Has anyone got the polars for this boat? If yes - please PM me to share. Thanks.
2) Has anyone done a trial IRC certificate yet? If not, I will do it but I need all the sail measurements. Mr Ullman???
Would love to explore this yacht's potential beyond just short-handed offshore racing if anyone else is interested.
Its too damn sexy to ignore!
+1
This would be the sweet spot for a little offshore weapon; by comparison an A35 tips the scales at 4450kgs vs 1580 for the C32
The question is how badly the carbon hull is hammered under IRC.
This would be a fun little ride to Vietnam....
Does the LOA hit the 10m for offshores around here?
9.75m LOA (@32 ft)
8.23m LWL (@27 ft)
Despite 30-footers surviving the TransPac I don't think this yacht would be allowed to enter HKG-Vietnam.
Manila-Boracay...now that's another story.
Inaugural Neptune Race this year was a blast reach all the way to the equator...another great spot for this little rocket.
Wouldn't be a very pleasant delivery to Manila though (from Singapore). Best to ship it.
EDIT: carbon hulls are as common as rainbow spinnakers now...IRC not punishing as much anymore...stern/bow overhangs, fathead main and the length of that prodder will be the problem.
#80
Posted 13 April 2011 - 11:24 AM
#81
Posted 13 April 2011 - 11:43 AM
<<snip>>
9.75m LOA (@32 ft)
8.23m LWL (@27 ft)
Despite 30-footers surviving the TransPac I don't think this yacht would be allowed to enter HKG-Vietnam.
Manila-Boracay...now that's another story.
Inaugural Neptune Race this year was a blast reach all the way to the equator...another great spot for this little rocket.
Wouldn't be a very pleasant delivery to Manila though (from Singapore). Best to ship it.
EDIT: carbon hulls are as common as rainbow spinnakers now...IRC not punishing as much anymore...stern/bow overhangs, fathead main and the length of that prodder will be the problem.
To bad on not making the cut for the RHKYC events (CSR, SF, or HK-Vietnam), boat seems like a lot of bang for the buck.
The rig plan Vince sent along looked like a single backstay so the RF shouldn't be horrendous. You might play a bit with the sail plan to see what tweaks would keep the speed up without too much of a rating hit, and a small reduction in STL might only sacrifice a degree or two of TWA with same same kites while getting enough pips back to help.
I'm not sure if the Manilla delivery would be considered pleasant on most boats...
#82
Posted 13 April 2011 - 12:03 PM
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
#83
Posted 13 April 2011 - 12:13 PM
Attached Files
#84
Posted 13 April 2011 - 02:19 PM
Sail plan
Thanks Bozo. Got this from Columbia already actually. For the trial cert, I need the actual sail dimensions...mid-births, luff lengths etc.
Maybe Dave Ullman might be kind enough to post them?
#85
Posted 13 April 2011 - 06:30 PM
#86
Posted 13 April 2011 - 06:54 PM
Are there any thoughts from Columbia about a retractable sprit? I guess another option (already mentioned) would be if you could remove the sprit and use a sym pole and spin for buoy racing.
Cheers,
jason
#87
Posted 13 April 2011 - 06:57 PM
#88
Posted 13 April 2011 - 11:31 PM
Was thinking about what you said earlier about a weak spot against the pole boats, thinking an S2 could be good in 12 - 18.
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
#89
Posted 14 April 2011 - 12:17 AM
Was thinking about what you said earlier about a weak spot against the pole boats, thinking an S2 could be good in 12 - 18.
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
Agreed Advocate!
With a Big C0, A1, A3 there is no running sail in the inventory. I doubt an A1 would be of any worth in 10+AWS. Maybe an A1.5 but your still stuffed in that Downwind marginal-heavy stuff.
#90
Posted 14 April 2011 - 12:30 AM
Was thinking about what you said earlier about a weak spot against the pole boats, thinking an S2 could be good in 12 - 18.
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
Yes, I understand...I just don't think this boat would perform on corrected time very well sailing deeper angles downhill.
Someone tell me I'm wrong and why. This is good discussion.
In 12-18 I think you could sail 165 TWA and still might be able to plane...certainly at the higher end of that wind range you would be...and you'd be going much faster than the sym/pole boats.
Gotta see the trial IRC certificate first and then we can start doing some comparisons on how much time you have to give other/typical boats...like a Mumm30 or an A35 or an Elan35 or a Platu (Farr25), X99, Young88 etc...
#91
Posted 14 April 2011 - 12:38 AM
I don't disagree Tuffie, just your earlier comments got me thinking.
Was thinking about what you said earlier about a weak spot against the pole boats, thinking an S2 could be good in 12 - 18.
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
Yes, I understand...I just don't think this boat would perform on corrected time very well sailing deeper angles downhill.
Someone tell me I'm wrong and why. This is good discussion.
In 12-18 I think you could sail 165 TWA and still might be able to plane...certainly at the higher end of that wind range you would be...and you'd be going much faster than the sym/pole boats.
Gotta see the trial IRC certificate first and then we can start doing some comparisons on how much time you have to give other/typical boats...like a Mumm30 or an A35 or an Elan35 or a Platu (Farr25), X99, Young88 etc...
Also agree, need to see a cert, but the discussion is good so far.
At 18 I think you would definitely be on an A2 or MH A3 if that is what you have and pulling numbers.
Also I would have a very different inventory for W/L vs distance.
#92
Posted 14 April 2011 - 12:45 AM
Yeah, still have nightmares about what Fairy Tern did when they went a big S runner. Admittedly this is a different beast, but still...
Was thinking about what you said earlier about a weak spot against the pole boats, thinking an S2 could be good in 12 - 18.
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
Agreed Advocate!
With a Big C0, A1, A3 there is no running sail in the inventory. I doubt an A1 would be of any worth in 10+AWS. Maybe an A1.5 but your still stuffed in that Downwind marginal-heavy stuff.
#93
Posted 14 April 2011 - 12:50 AM
I don't disagree Tuffie, just your earlier comments got me thinking.
Was thinking about what you said earlier about a weak spot against the pole boats, thinking an S2 could be good in 12 - 18.
what are you thinking tuffie, a1, s2, a3?
No way man! This thing would suck DDW (or deeper than 165...170 TWA).
How about Code-0, A1, A3
BIG zero!!
Yes, I understand...I just don't think this boat would perform on corrected time very well sailing deeper angles downhill.
Someone tell me I'm wrong and why. This is good discussion.
In 12-18 I think you could sail 165 TWA and still might be able to plane...certainly at the higher end of that wind range you would be...and you'd be going much faster than the sym/pole boats.
Gotta see the trial IRC certificate first and then we can start doing some comparisons on how much time you have to give other/typical boats...like a Mumm30 or an A35 or an Elan35 or a Platu (Farr25), X99, Young88 etc...
Also agree, need to see a cert, but the discussion is good so far.
At 18 I think you would definitely be on an A2 or MH A3 if that is what you have and pulling numbers.
Also I would have a very different inventory for W/L vs distance.
Personally I would doubt its W/L performance without an S-Sail. Sure have your Reaching A-Sails but you do need depth. 165degrees may be too deep. Look at a Farr 40, when the breeze is up the DW Target angle is 148ish to keep the boat moving.
#94
Posted 14 April 2011 - 03:55 AM
I only sailed on the first "version" of this boat twice so take these observations with a grain of salt, but that experience was memorable for two things.
First: when there was any decent wind above 12 the boat was launched and dead simple to sail to fast numbers. The boat is light and has a good shape and you can build AWS and carry it down with you. We were doing 12 in 12.
Second: on a random leg / point-to-point race, if it's light and the mark is between DDW and your best VMG TWA, it feels hopeless. I doubt even an S1 would help much. You simply can't get there from here and any jibe is just extra distance, pure and simple. If you are racing against a leadmine that can sail those deeper angles without the huge sacrifice of a planing boat, you're pretty much done; all you can do is pray for a header.
#95
Posted 14 April 2011 - 04:16 AM
#96
Posted 14 April 2011 - 04:32 AM
Good question!12 in 12, at what angle?
It was a year ago so I have to reconstruct this. We were going down the backside of Catalina Island so it must have been VMG sailing or a broad reach.
Here's what I wrote the day after:
We didn't get the prolonged running we were hoping for, but in the few brief hours we got we were doing steady 9 knots with runs up to 12 and 13 knots several times a minute. The wind was around 10 knots and the swell was nothing of much significance. Completely effortless. It just goes that fast.
I was impressed.
#97
Posted 14 April 2011 - 05:57 AM
Good question!
12 in 12, at what angle?
It was a year ago so I have to reconstruct this. We were going down the backside of Catalina Island so it must have been VMG sailing or a broad reach.
Here's what I wrote the day after:We didn't get the prolonged running we were hoping for, but in the few brief hours we got we were doing steady 9 knots with runs up to 12 and 13 knots several times a minute. The wind was around 10 knots and the swell was nothing of much significance. Completely effortless. It just goes that fast.
I was impressed.
In your opinion, how much different are these two hulls and in what way? The transom profile of the new C32 looks very different from the older yacht. Not having stood in front/on either yacht I'm coming from a distinct disadvantage here.
Anyone with some thoughts on key differences between old and new C32?
Thanks.
#98
Posted 14 April 2011 - 06:05 AM
Is now looking low aspect, or is it just me?
#99
Posted 14 April 2011 - 10:35 AM
Not having superimposed the lines plans or anything nearly so empirical I would just have to state the obvious: the Col 32 reflects the latest thinking of the same designer as the Col 30.In your opinion, how much different are these two hulls and in what way?
#100
Posted 14 April 2011 - 05:04 PM
Not having superimposed the lines plans or anything nearly so empirical I would just have to state the obvious: the Col 32 reflects the latest thinking of the same designer as the Col 30.In your opinion, how much different are these two hulls and in what way?
Superimposition? State the obvious?
Any opinion anywhere in there?
How do the boats differ?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users














