Jump to content


What's the goss on the Farr 280?


  • Please log in to reply
262 replies to this topic

#101 SCANAS

SCANAS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 782 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Water and Mud

Posted 21 January 2014 - 06:51 AM

Not sure how the yanks work but it needs to have a diesel to race 90% of the Coastal races here in OZ.



#102 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 21 January 2014 - 09:53 AM

Coastal races? Wouldn't they also be Cat 3? Those hiking lines aren't Cat 3 and I doubt the deck, cockpit and hatch layouts are compliant.



#103 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 21 January 2014 - 10:25 AM

Diesel is for cat 2, which most of the east coast races are nowadays. Lifelines can be modified easily enough, and remove able toe rails can be added, but I would also question the hatch layout. The fored hatch looks like an anchor well!

#104 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 10:37 AM

There are also minimum length requirements of 9.0m for some of these races, so the Farr 280 can't compete anyway.

#105 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 21 January 2014 - 05:16 PM

I don't think this would be easily modified to Cat 3 at all. And if it is an OD boat, why would you modify it? Why would you have to? Maybe it's geared to the Med? It's not a big secret I'm really liking these GP26's, but a coastal/offshore 28-footer at the price point of this boat would also be really attractive. An extra .75 meters makes a lot of difference when the boat is this small, and if Farr actually came up with a good update of the Mumm30, I agree with them there would be a lot of interest. Just seems they missed the mark with this concept.

 

I guess my point is if you are going to make a 28-foot flush deck day racer, then lose 1000# (to make it actual low displacement) and lose the diesel complexity. If you are going to make a 28-foot offshore/coastal boat, it needs a different forward hatch, more interior volume, needs to be Cat 3 minimum compliant bone stock, and lose the double backstay/winch arrangement.



#106 Savage 17

Savage 17

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 06:03 PM

Herb has some good points.... Not sure what the overall design strategy was.... It looks like it has some parts of the Farr 30 but not all of them. It looks very much like a smaller HPR design more then off shore capable boat.



#107 SCANAS

SCANAS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 782 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Water and Mud

Posted 21 January 2014 - 09:14 PM

I don't think this would be easily modified to Cat 3 at all. And if it is an OD boat, why would you modify it? Why would you have to? Maybe it's geared to the Med? It's not a big secret I'm really liking these GP26's, but a coastal/offshore 28-footer at the price point of this boat would also be really attractive. An extra .75 meters makes a lot of difference when the boat is this small, and if Farr actually came up with a good update of the Mumm30, I agree with them there would be a lot of interest. Just seems they missed the mark with this concept.
 
I guess my point is if you are going to make a 28-foot flush deck day racer, then lose 1000# (to make it actual low displacement) and lose the diesel complexity. If you are going to make a 28-foot offshore/coastal boat, it needs a different forward hatch, more interior volume, needs to be Cat 3 minimum compliant bone stock, and lose the double backstay/winch arrangement.


The Farr25 says its CAT3 on the Farr site.

But it looks like they are pitching the 28 as a OD DAY RACER

#108 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 11:29 PM

I don't think this would be easily modified to Cat 3 at all. And if it is an OD boat, why would you modify it? Why would you have to? Maybe it's geared to the Med? It's not a big secret I'm really liking these GP26's, but a coastal/offshore 28-footer at the price point of this boat would also be really attractive. An extra .75 meters makes a lot of difference when the boat is this small, and if Farr actually came up with a good update of the Mumm30, I agree with them there would be a lot of interest. Just seems they missed the mark with this concept.
 
I guess my point is if you are going to make a 28-foot flush deck day racer, then lose 1000# (to make it actual low displacement) and lose the diesel complexity. If you are going to make a 28-foot offshore/coastal boat, it needs a different forward hatch, more interior volume, needs to be Cat 3 minimum compliant bone stock, and lose the double backstay/winch arrangement.


The Farr25 says its CAT3 on the Farr site.
But it looks like they are pitching the 28 as a OD DAY RACER

That makes sense. Load a 25 footer up with equipment for races it's too short to sail in anyway and then day sail the bigger boat that costs twice as much.

You'd have to say that Farr Yacht Design doesn't seem to have much of a plan as far as creating a sensible product line.

#109 dogedog

dogedog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 331 posts
  • Location:cleveland, OH
  • Interests:sailing...sailing...sailing

Posted 22 January 2014 - 12:26 AM

Let's hope there is a farr300 in the works with the suggestions made here. Lighter weight , long enough, real lifelines for hiking, compact trailer able and ready for offshore like the mumm30 was , etc.

To change the subject - why didn't the soto 30 catch on if this is what everyone wants (or says they do).

On second thought maybe they've studied the marketplace.

Just make the mumm30 again using current technology and it will suffice.

#110 SCANAS

SCANAS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 782 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Water and Mud

Posted 22 January 2014 - 05:42 AM

It would need to be a FARR3200 to make it 30ft LWL as the

 

FARR280 is 26ft LWL

 

FARR400 is 36.45ft LWL



#111 TBone

TBone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 352 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 08:22 AM

...why didn't the soto 30 catch on if this is what everyone wants (or says they do).

On second thought maybe they've studied the marketplace.


Soto 30 was stillborn...never made it to the marketplace.

#112 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 08:42 AM

...why didn't the soto 30 catch on if this is what everyone wants (or says they do).

On second thought maybe they've studied the marketplace.


Soto 30 was stillborn...never made it to the marketplace.

 

 

I think they built one boat and then the company went belly-up.



#113 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 22 January 2014 - 09:08 AM

To change the subject - why didn't the soto 30 catch on if this is what everyone wants (or says they do).

 

Big difference between what crew say they want and what PBOs are happy to write cheques for. 



#114 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 22 January 2014 - 09:11 AM

 

...why didn't the soto 30 catch on if this is what everyone wants (or says they do).

On second thought maybe they've studied the marketplace.


Soto 30 was stillborn...never made it to the marketplace.

 

 think they built one boat and then the company went belly-up.

 

Which sort of indicates that the 30'ish heavily-inshore biased race boat market isn't much of a market in the post 2008 world. 

 

If you're going to race inshore only, why go 30'ish and 5-7 crew, when as an owner, you can have just as much fun at 20'ish with 3-4 crew? Far less hassle, far fewer headaches. 



#115 Ian Gordon

Ian Gordon

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Location:Annapolis

Posted 29 January 2014 - 06:18 PM

I wanted to respond to some of the comments and remarks by Heriberto as I have some first-hand knowledge of the Farr 280.  I am the owner of boat #1 and work for Farr Yacht Design.

 

As for pricing, we worked very hard to keep the Farr 280 at what we think is a really competitive price for all the features the boat offers.  One of the things I have learned through this process is it would be very easy to build the ideal boat, but it would also make the boat extremely expensive.

 

The Farr 280 was designed with the intention of being a OD boat, but we also understood it would have to be successful in rating systems.  Whenever it came to making a decision we generally sided with whatever would make the boat perform well, thus giving it the best chance to rate over other boats.  We wanted the average sailor to have the ability to walk down the dock and have a boat that strongly resembles a TP52 and has many of the same sailing features.  The Farr 280 will have a spin take down system, fixed (but easily removable) sprit, an on deck hydraulic adjustable forestay and mast jack, and twin backstays for an ample square top mainsail.  Yes, the square top main does provide significant performance increase and we want the boat to do well in light air and handicap scenarios.    

 

The fixed bow sprit is there for the ease of sailing and provides the crew with fewer jobs to do.  The forward hatch is the way it is to make the takedown system more functional so that no person has to ever go on the bow.  There is a retractable canvas hatch the can be worked from the pit area to keep all the water out.  In costal type racing we also have a solid deadlight cover that can be fixed into place.

 

The Farr 280 will be Cat 3 compliant and has a set of offshore stanchions that can be easily put into place!

 

As for the inboard engine, this is there to reduce the hassle of messing around with outboard engines and get out to the race course faster.  The Farr 280 should motor at 8.2 knots!  I have just recently spent Key West Race Week on a J70 and most peoples engines didn’t work and there was nothing more frustrating than wrestling around with the outboard.  Plus it leaked oil all over the boat while we were moving it around.  There is something to be said for walking down the dock, turning the key and going.  It is also better for safety!

 

Finally, with regards to the displacement, the Farr 280 is intended to be an enjoyable boat to sail upwind as well as downwind while having reduced crew numbers.  The righting moment has to come from somewhere.  Comparatively to other boats with engines the Farr 280 is a rather light displacement boat at 3500lbs.  In my mind the ideal crew number is 5 people but the boat is set up that you can sail with more or less.  http://www.farryacht...-280-one-design



#116 Murphness

Murphness

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, Brewing Beer, Drinking Beer, Skiing and other outsidey things

Posted 29 January 2014 - 07:45 PM

Thanks! Looks like a fun ride... 

 

When do we get to see some OTW action? Will you be sailing it out of Anap? How many boats on order?

 

Cheers,

 

Murphness



#117 schoonerman

schoonerman

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,246 posts
  • Location:San Francisco
  • Interests:sailing, sex and success...not necessarily in order

Posted 29 January 2014 - 09:19 PM

Thanks for your post Ian. Boat looks like huge BFTB!

Why the exotic engine? 18HP is WAY more than the boat needs. No deals to be had with Yanmar?

Keep the pics coming...if possible.

#118 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,114 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 29 January 2014 - 09:29 PM

Hay Ian - sounds like you have been down taking a look at Wanda's spin retrieval system.....................



#119 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 30 January 2014 - 02:00 AM

If you have proper stanchions and lifelines then why not leave them on all the time? Saves money and you don't waste time changing over. A OD regatta offshore would be Cat 4 and require lifelines anyway.

 

Similar comments apply to the hatch cover. If you have a proper cover then why not use it? Otherwise, it's just a matter of time before the canvas cover fails and the boat gets a belly full of water.

 

I like the diesel engine - much safer offshore.



#120 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 10 February 2014 - 05:17 AM

Thanks for your responses, Ian.

 

I understand much of what you are saying, I own a 30-foot boat, it was built in 1985. It is fully offshore capable and weighs 3300lbs (that makes it four feet longer, and still lighter). It has no inboard though (also has a heavy aluminum mast though), and with an old-style fin keel (no bulb), it doesn't go up hill in a stiff breeze very well at all. So I agree on having stability, not sure you necessarily need to add displacement to make that happen though. I may be wrong, but it seems to me the displacement length ratio is greater on this than the Farr/Mumm30. But ok, I can understand this, and that it is also probably a compromise in order to keep the price down to not have lighter construction.

 

Also, I agree, not having an inboard is inconvenient, but not much more than that. Most of the time, we would actually sail in and out of our slip, just like in the days of old. But that is a judgment call, take the inboard diesel (and the extra $8-12K in price) and live with the extra displacement, or deal with the inconvenience. Different people's mileage will vary on this one, but man, 18 ponies is a heavy-duty motor. A 10-hp would push this thing just as fast in all but the worst conditions (which for obvious reasons this boat probably won't ever see).

 

And I can also grant you on the fixed bowsprit (as long as you could remove it in port). That is probably a fair tradeoff feature. But I'm going to draw the line at the lifelines and the forward hatch. Why would you not just leave the lifelines on all the time? A canvas cover for the forward hatch? Really? And did it seriously have to be so far forward to function in this manner? 

 

Regarding all the tweaks, an adjustable forestay is fine*, it's the runners that cause the problem.

 

I appreciate that it may be a set of tradeoffs that work well for you, I just don't think that would work for me. I'm in the market to upgrade (or downgrade, or sidegrade) from my boat and this is boat is not enough offshore leaning for me. I'm not sure I see it working really well for the Melges32/J70 crowd either, but I guess time will tell.

 

* Although hydraulics, again, yuk, I just pulled all of them off my boat because they suck.



#121 SCANAS

SCANAS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 782 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Water and Mud

Posted 10 February 2014 - 11:45 AM

Diesels and sail drives are great Vs an outboard but most of our races downunder are Cat 2 and have minimum length restrictions which the 280 doesn't satisfy.

#122 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 04:01 PM

The other weekend I decided to see "what's the goss?" about the Farr 280, so my partner and  I met with Patrick and Ian to find out .

 

We are potential purchasers of a boat in this size range.

 

In a word, "wow!!"

 

The total package they have put together is very focused on maximizing a great sailing experience in a tightly controlled OD class.

 

They brought the sexy back with a hull that will do well in W/L racing and still be a strong reaching boat.

 

So you are saying, "what is sexy about the drawings on the website?" Well those rough renderings are NOT what you will be paying for... Are they related? Yes, but the design team was smart not to give away the "keys to the castle" with overly detailed drawings. It is a sharp looking hull that looks like it has seen 1000's of hours of design time.

 

Many have shared what they like and dislike about the numbers they have seen from the website.  I was well aware of the numbers going into our meeting and the numbers they have put together make sense in light of the plan they have for the boat.

 

The Farr design group did all the engineering and is overseeing production of the 280.  This strategy has created the new VO 65's that weigh within 60 Kg's from the highest to lowest outliers in the fleet.  NOTHING has been left to chance with this build.

 

They went through EVERYTHING about the boat with us and they thought about every system.

 

So we are really looking forward to getting out on the boat in Annapolis when it arrives in March.

 

I would encourage anyone considering a boat in this size to give the Farr 280 a long hard look.  It will most certainly impress.



#123 TBone

TBone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 352 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 04:35 PM

Unfortunate font choice, gone.

#124 Savage 17

Savage 17

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 06:09 PM

The other weekend I decided to see "what's the goss?" about the Farr 280, so my partner and  I met with Patrick and Ian to find out .
 
We are potential purchasers of a boat in this size range.
 
In a word, "wow!!"
 
The total package they have put together is very focused on maximizing a great sailing experience in a tightly controlled OD class.
 
They brought the sexy back with a hull that will do well in W/L racing and still be a strong reaching boat.
 
So you are saying, "what is sexy about the drawings on the website?" Well those rough renderings are NOT what you will be paying for... Are they related? Yes, but the design team was smart not to give away the "keys to the castle" with overly detailed drawings. It is a sharp looking hull that looks like it has seen 1000's of hours of design time.
 
Many have shared what they like and dislike about the numbers they have seen from the website.  I was well aware of the numbers going into our meeting and the numbers they have put together make sense in light of the plan they have for the boat.
 
The Farr design group did all the engineering and is overseeing production of the 280.  This strategy has created the new VO 65's that weigh within 60 Kg's from the highest to lowest outliers in the fleet.  NOTHING has been left to chance with this build.
 
They went through EVERYTHING about the boat with us and they thought about every system.
 
So we are really looking forward to getting out on the boat in Annapolis when it arrives in March.
 
I would encourage anyone considering a boat in this size to give the Farr 280 a long hard look.  It will most certainly impress.


Who is building the boats? Same company as Farr 25 OD?

#125 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 06:10 PM

My "poor choice" of font style, still doesn't change the fact that the 280 is a REALLY well thought out boat.  Hope this reads better for all.

 

 

 

The other weekend I decided to see "what's the goss?" about the Farr 280, so my partner and I met with Patrick and Ian to find out .

 

We are potential purchasers of a boat in this size range.

 

In a word, "wow!!"

 

The total package they have put together is very focused on maximizing a great sailing experience in a tightly controlled OD class.

 

They brought the sexy back with a hull that will do well in W/L racing and still be a strong reaching boat.

 

So you are saying, "what is sexy about the drawings on the website?" Well those rough renderings are NOT what you will be paying for... Are they related? Yes, but the design team was smart not to give away the "keys to the castle" with overly detailed drawings. It is a sharp looking hull that looks like it has seen 1000's of hours of design time.

 

Many have shared what they like and dislike about the numbers they have seen from the website. I was well aware of the numbers going into our meeting and the numbers they have put together make sense in light of the plan they have for the boat.

 

The Farr design group did all the engineering and is overseeing production of the 280. This strategy has created the new VO 65's that weigh within 60 Kg's from the highest to lowest outliers in the fleet. NOTHING has been left to chance with this build.

 

They went through EVERYTHING about the boat with us and they thought about every system.

 

So we are really looking forward to getting out on the boat in Annapolis when it arrives in March.

 

I would encourage anyone considering a boat in this size to give the Farr 280 a long hard look. It will most certainly impress.



#126 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 06:16 PM

No, Premier Composites in Dubai. 

 

They used their 5 axis machine to mill all the moulds for the structural parts.  Farr provided all the cut files for the laminates.

The other weekend I decided to see "what's the goss?" about the Farr 280, so my partner and  I met with Patrick and Ian to find out .
 
We are potential purchasers of a boat in this size range.
 
In a word, "wow!!"
 
The total package they have put together is very focused on maximizing a great sailing experience in a tightly controlled OD class.
 
They brought the sexy back with a hull that will do well in W/L racing and still be a strong reaching boat.
 
So you are saying, "what is sexy about the drawings on the website?" Well those rough renderings are NOT what you will be paying for... Are they related? Yes, but the design team was smart not to give away the "keys to the castle" with overly detailed drawings. It is a sharp looking hull that looks like it has seen 1000's of hours of design time.
 
Many have shared what they like and dislike about the numbers they have seen from the website.  I was well aware of the numbers going into our meeting and the numbers they have put together make sense in light of the plan they have for the boat.
 
The Farr design group did all the engineering and is overseeing production of the 280.  This strategy has created the new VO 65's that weigh within 60 Kg's from the highest to lowest outliers in the fleet.  NOTHING has been left to chance with this build.
 
They went through EVERYTHING about the boat with us and they thought about every system.
 
So we are really looking forward to getting out on the boat in Annapolis when it arrives in March.
 
I would encourage anyone considering a boat in this size to give the Farr 280 a long hard look.  It will most certainly impress.


Who is building the boats? Same company as Farr 25 OD?


#127 Savage 17

Savage 17

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 15 February 2014 - 07:48 PM

How many boats are coming to the USA? How many orders?

#128 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 20 February 2014 - 02:48 AM

Heriberto,

 

In an earlier post you said you were considering a Melges 32 which has a hydraulic jack for rig tension as well.

 

I get your distain for old hydraulics (slow, leaky etc.) but this is new era.

 

Having sailed on boats with hydraulic jacks, once you go jack...

 

you will really like it.

 

Thanks for your responses, Ian.

 

I understand much of what you are saying, I own a 30-foot boat, it was built in 1985. It is fully offshore capable and weighs 3300lbs (that makes it four feet longer, and still lighter). It has no inboard though (also has a heavy aluminum mast though), and with an old-style fin keel (no bulb), it doesn't go up hill in a stiff breeze very well at all. So I agree on having stability, not sure you necessarily need to add displacement to make that happen though. I may be wrong, but it seems to me the displacement length ratio is greater on this than the Farr/Mumm30. But ok, I can understand this, and that it is also probably a compromise in order to keep the price down to not have lighter construction.

 

Also, I agree, not having an inboard is inconvenient, but not much more than that. Most of the time, we would actually sail in and out of our slip, just like in the days of old. But that is a judgment call, take the inboard diesel (and the extra $8-12K in price) and live with the extra displacement, or deal with the inconvenience. Different people's mileage will vary on this one, but man, 18 ponies is a heavy-duty motor. A 10-hp would push this thing just as fast in all but the worst conditions (which for obvious reasons this boat probably won't ever see).

 

And I can also grant you on the fixed bowsprit (as long as you could remove it in port). That is probably a fair tradeoff feature. But I'm going to draw the line at the lifelines and the forward hatch. Why would you not just leave the lifelines on all the time? A canvas cover for the forward hatch? Really? And did it seriously have to be so far forward to function in this manner? 

 

Regarding all the tweaks, an adjustable forestay is fine*, it's the runners that cause the problem.

 

I appreciate that it may be a set of tradeoffs that work well for you, I just don't think that would work for me. I'm in the market to upgrade (or downgrade, or sidegrade) from my boat and this is boat is not enough offshore leaning for me. I'm not sure I see it working really well for the Melges32/J70 crowd either, but I guess time will tell.

 

* Although hydraulics, again, yuk, I just pulled all of them off my boat because they suck.



#129 Murphness

Murphness

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, Brewing Beer, Drinking Beer, Skiing and other outsidey things

Posted 20 February 2014 - 02:52 PM

Heriberto,

 

In an earlier post you said you were considering a Melges 32 which has a hydraulic jack for rig tension as well.

 

I get your distain for old hydraulics (slow, leaky etc.) but this is new era.

 

Having sailed on boats with hydraulic jacks, once you go jack...

 

you will really like it.

 

Thanks for your responses, Ian.

 

I understand much of what you are saying, I own a 30-foot boat, it was built in 1985. It is fully offshore capable and weighs 3300lbs (that makes it four feet longer, and still lighter). It has no inboard though (also has a heavy aluminum mast though), and with an old-style fin keel (no bulb), it doesn't go up hill in a stiff breeze very well at all. So I agree on having stability, not sure you necessarily need to add displacement to make that happen though. I may be wrong, but it seems to me the displacement length ratio is greater on this than the Farr/Mumm30. But ok, I can understand this, and that it is also probably a compromise in order to keep the price down to not have lighter construction.

 

Also, I agree, not having an inboard is inconvenient, but not much more than that. Most of the time, we would actually sail in and out of our slip, just like in the days of old. But that is a judgment call, take the inboard diesel (and the extra $8-12K in price) and live with the extra displacement, or deal with the inconvenience. Different people's mileage will vary on this one, but man, 18 ponies is a heavy-duty motor. A 10-hp would push this thing just as fast in all but the worst conditions (which for obvious reasons this boat probably won't ever see).

 

And I can also grant you on the fixed bowsprit (as long as you could remove it in port). That is probably a fair tradeoff feature. But I'm going to draw the line at the lifelines and the forward hatch. Why would you not just leave the lifelines on all the time? A canvas cover for the forward hatch? Really? And did it seriously have to be so far forward to function in this manner? 

 

Regarding all the tweaks, an adjustable forestay is fine*, it's the runners that cause the problem.

 

I appreciate that it may be a set of tradeoffs that work well for you, I just don't think that would work for me. I'm in the market to upgrade (or downgrade, or sidegrade) from my boat and this is boat is not enough offshore leaning for me. I'm not sure I see it working really well for the Melges32/J70 crowd either, but I guess time will tell.

 

* Although hydraulics, again, yuk, I just pulled all of them off my boat because they suck.

Truth!

 

Tuning the rig with the flick of a valve and a few pumps of a lever makes recreating settings that much easier. It's really a no-brainer, even if it means keeping a few spill pads down below to clean up a leak here or there...



#130 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 20 February 2014 - 05:51 PM

Heriberto,

 

In an earlier post you said you were considering a Melges 32 which has a hydraulic jack for rig tension as well.

 

I get your distain for old hydraulics (slow, leaky etc.) but this is new era.

 

Having sailed on boats with hydraulic jacks, once you go jack...

 

you will really like it.

 

Really depends on what it is, and the installation work. Hydraulics done quick/cheap are going to be filthy and not particularly accurate. In fact every such system I saw on private boats (motor cruisers and sail) should have been replaced by pneumatics instead. However, newer and better components are available -and- a good installation will make it powerful & highly accurate.

 

Yes this is part of what I did for a real job, many years worth.

 

FB- Doug



#131 Jerryd

Jerryd

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts

Posted 20 February 2014 - 06:45 PM

Doug, of course on a Rocket 22 all you need is a couple of turns on the mast jack screw ;) No leaks, clean, and always reliable!



#132 TBone

TBone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 352 posts

Posted 20 February 2014 - 06:58 PM

Doug, of course on a Rocket 22 all you need is a couple of turns on the mast jack screw ;) No leaks, clean, and always reliable!


Pictures?

#133 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 20 February 2014 - 11:16 PM

Heriberto,

 

In an earlier post you said you were considering a Melges 32 which has a hydraulic jack for rig tension as well.

 

I get your distain for old hydraulics (slow, leaky etc.) but this is new era.

 

Having sailed on boats with hydraulic jacks, once you go jack...

 

you will really like it.

 

Really depends on what it is, and the installation work. Hydraulics done quick/cheap are going to be filthy and not particularly accurate. In fact every such system I saw on private boats (motor cruisers and sail) should have been replaced by pneumatics instead. However, newer and better components are available -and- a good installation will make it powerful & highly accurate.

 

Yes this is part of what I did for a real job, many years worth.

 

FB- Doug

The stored energy in a high pressure pneumatics system would be enormous, no way I would want to operate one. Unless the pressure in a mast jack system are much lower than I imagine.

 

Using positive-seal connectors (i.e. o ring face seal) instead of tapered threads cuts down on leaks a shitload, and makes it much easier for an inexperienced person to fit.



#134 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 20 February 2014 - 11:51 PM

 

Heriberto,

 

In an earlier post you said you were considering a Melges 32 which has a hydraulic jack for rig tension as well.

 

I get your distain for old hydraulics (slow, leaky etc.) but this is new era.

 

Having sailed on boats with hydraulic jacks, once you go jack...

 

you will really like it.

 

Really depends on what it is, and the installation work. Hydraulics done quick/cheap are going to be filthy and not particularly accurate. In fact every such system I saw on private boats (motor cruisers and sail) should have been replaced by pneumatics instead. However, newer and better components are available -and- a good installation will make it powerful & highly accurate.

 

Yes this is part of what I did for a real job, many years worth.

 

FB- Doug

The stored energy in a high pressure pneumatics system would be enormous, no way I would want to operate one. Unless the pressure in a mast jack system are much lower than I imagine.

 

Using positive-seal connectors (i.e. o ring face seal) instead of tapered threads cuts down on leaks a shitload, and makes it much easier for an inexperienced person to fit.

 

Why? It's just air. I had a bunch of systems from ~4,000 psi on down that worked fine, the biggest problem was underspec'd stuff getting hot. However the rules about "stored energy" (thought of this later) might be a problem for such a system. On a racing boat I'd be careful to protect all the tubing runs from getting stepped on, but I can't think of any inherent problems other than the rules about stored energy.

 

As for cuff and face seal connectors, yeah one of the things I used to love was going in to fix hydraulic systems that were working really hard thru home plumbing. And stuff has gotten a LOT better in the past 10 years.

 

FB- Doug



#135 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 21 February 2014 - 07:33 AM

The danger of a hose bursting is related to the stored energy of the system. for hydraulics, unless there is an accumulator in the system, a burst hose is flailing around with only the power of the pump moving it, as the fluids are essentially incompressible. In a pneumatic system, you have a very significant amount of stored energy within the gas itself, which will have the hose thrashing around pretty violently. This is manageable with things like whip checks, but how many diy installers on yachts would use those?

#136 Jerryd

Jerryd

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts

Posted 21 February 2014 - 11:39 AM

Sorry, before I cleaned up and repainted, but you get the idea.

Attached Files



#137 Just a Skosh

Just a Skosh

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Location:DC
  • Interests:sailing, backpacking

Posted 21 February 2014 - 02:12 PM

Looks like an interesting concept.  Kind of like the Mumm/Farr 30 but maybe fewer crew required?  The hull shape certainly looks like it would require fewer bodies on the rail to keep it flat going upwind, which I think is a great design feature.  Seems like most boats these days are optimized for reaching/running which is great and fast and sexy but if you want to go upwind without 10 bodies on the rail and still go pretty fast downhill you need a compromise underwater.

 

The hatch on the foredeck doest seem pretty far forward, but as long as everything worked fine most of the time the bow dude shouldn't have to go up there much.  Having a spin retreival system built into the design makes sense, but again, it has to work most of the time. 

 

Would I crew on this boat?  Hell yes.  Would I drop $100K plus on a brand new one without an established class association?  Probably?  If I was looking to get a high performance boat, I'd also want to be able to take the wife out for an evening sail every once in a while and just putter around without being too overpowered.

 

Ian, if you're looking for crew when the new boat gets here, hit me up. 



#138 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 21 February 2014 - 02:16 PM

The danger of a hose bursting is related to the stored energy of the system. for hydraulics, unless there is an accumulator in the system, a burst hose is flailing around with only the power of the pump moving it, as the fluids are essentially incompressible. In a pneumatic system, you have a very significant amount of stored energy within the gas itself, which will have the hose thrashing around pretty violently. This is manageable with things like whip checks, but how many diy installers on yachts would use those?

 

Reasonably capable ones.

;)

 

(there, I'm being tactful.... I almost said "non-dumbasses")

 

Also, unless it's been chafed or crimped, the risk of a hose bursting is very low. Just for funsies, I used to pump up various components with a hydro tester to see when they'd bust. That's with water, so no stored energy as you say, but it was amazing what things would take.

 

FB- Doug



#139 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 21 February 2014 - 10:03 PM

Not being in the 8-9 figure club, I have never expressed interest in a Melges 32. I'm sure hydraulic systems have improved and I doubt this system will leak anywhere near as much as the inboard diesel would already. It was a very minor observation.



#140 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 22 February 2014 - 03:14 AM

Heriberto,

 

My apologies, I was thread weary when I read your earlier post.

 

"I'm not sure I see it working really well for the Melges32/J70 crowd either"  was your original quote.  How my brain turned this into you being interested in a Melges 32, I have no idea...

 

You will still really like mast jacks though...



#141 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 22 February 2014 - 03:19 AM

Part of the beauty of this design is the optimum heel angle is around 22 degrees, if I remember correctly.  Sailing this boat flat upwind will make it stick to the water.

 

Looks like an interesting concept.  Kind of like the Mumm/Farr 30 but maybe fewer crew required?  The hull shape certainly looks like it would require fewer bodies on the rail to keep it flat going upwind, which I think is a great design feature.  Seems like most boats these days are optimized for reaching/running which is great and fast and sexy but if you want to go upwind without 10 bodies on the rail and still go pretty fast downhill you need a compromise underwater.

 

The hatch on the foredeck doest seem pretty far forward, but as long as everything worked fine most of the time the bow dude shouldn't have to go up there much.  Having a spin retreival system built into the design makes sense, but again, it has to work most of the time. 

 

Would I crew on this boat?  Hell yes.  Would I drop $100K plus on a brand new one without an established class association?  Probably?  If I was looking to get a high performance boat, I'd also want to be able to take the wife out for an evening sail every once in a while and just putter around without being too overpowered.

 

Ian, if you're looking for crew when the new boat gets here, hit me up. 



#142 Yard Dog

Yard Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD

Posted 28 February 2014 - 12:31 AM

FYD put up a slide show of the 280's mold being built on You Tube:

 

 http://www.youtube.c...h?v=N1Hmrc6hj9k



#143 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 02 March 2014 - 02:57 PM

Here are some of Patrick’s thoughts about the 280 design (downloaded from the Farr Webpage on 3/2/2014):

Attached Files



#144 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 08 March 2014 - 04:39 PM

So my boat partner and I were reviewing our notes and two points came back to mind:

 

1. The base cost INCLUDES a Triad trailer.  The boat is shipped from Dubai in a shipping cradle and this cradle fits into the Triad trailer with either the keel on or off.  Triad is pleasant to work with, but it is great that FYD has done this leg work to simplify boat ownership.  

 

2.  The Southern Spar is designed to survive the loads of an A0 (even though the class rules don't allow) and has  a clever system to allow the sailing team to quickly attach the shrouds to the boat and create repeatable settings for rig tuning.  You need two nuts and a socket wrench to attach each shroud.  The headstay ram is designed to be used while sailing to help add or remove helm as needed, while maintaining constant luff tension.  The TP 52 I sailed on did not have this setup, but I’m not sure it is allowed by the rules now either.

 


#145 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 08 March 2014 - 04:42 PM

How many boats are coming to the USA? How many orders?

Hull #1 will be at Charleston Race Week in April.  Three boats are ordered.  One is headed to Europe (Italy I believe) and forgot where the third is going.



#146 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 March 2014 - 05:02 PM

There's an awful lot to like about this boat, really is. I see where they are going with the rig, and that makes sense. But as much as I love diesel, I can't get sold on a 20hp diesel in a 28 foot around the cans day racer. In a 29-32 foot offshore racer, that is a great feature, but that isn't what this boat is. There's not enough volume below, and that forward hatch with remotely-controlled canvas cover is NOT an offshore feature. Neither is the lifeline layout. Even the HPR 40's are having huge problems with water ingress offshore, without hatches like that. This boat is going to be incredibly wet, and uncomfortable for even over-night races.

 

Pulling the engine and structure out of there takes maybe $10K out of the boat and 400-500lbs in engine, prop, gearbox, structure, tankage, controls, etc., It makes the boat lighter and faster (with out the saildrive drag), much, much easier to maintain, and opens all sorts of room for sail storage, beer, etc.. Still do not get it. Why the added expense, weight and speed reduction? Good design is the art of eliminating unnecessary features. What worked in the Farr/Mumm30 doesn't necessarily work in a smaller boat two decades later. A heavy diesel auxillary is one of those things that on balance, IMO, doesn't work.



#147 andyxs

andyxs

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 367 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 12:16 AM

I agree in part with that. But it totally depends on where you sail, for tidal France and UK a dedicated diesel makes total sense. An outboard is just not going to cut it in places

#148 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,114 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 09 March 2014 - 03:01 PM

I think the boat looks to be one of the better idea out of FYD in a while.  There are some serious downsides that is making it less interesting to me and I bet a fair amount of other peeps:  It is too heavy, Inboard on this size boat is overkill (especially if you want to call it a GP boat but it sounds more like their marketing ploy), Fixed keel in this size range is stupid and exclude drysailing in many venues (and trailering is a PITA compared to a lift keel boat)  The canvas cover solution is fine: cheap and easy and they add in a fixed cover for coastal racing (along with cat 4 and higher lifelines)



#149 dogedog

dogedog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 331 posts
  • Location:cleveland, OH
  • Interests:sailing...sailing...sailing

Posted 09 March 2014 - 04:25 PM

Love Farr, love the look of this boat but the keel not lifting seems to me to be putting your head in the sand from a design /evolution perspective. It would appeal to a wider audience of trailer guys if it was lifting.

Looking forward to the next Farr of this size range. This one seems destined for less than
10 Being made.

#150 gone

gone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 04:37 PM

Having sailed on the HPR 40’s I get the water egress thing, ankle deep (or higher) could be common on a windy day.

 

I too was skeptical of the “soft” hatch given my experience, then again I watched gallons of water flow through a bow hatch held open by sheets, a tack line and halyard so I went in with an open mind.

 

The “soft” hatch has a bolt rope (my term not FYD’s) sewn into the side and forward edges.  The hatch moves forward and aft in two slots and the forward bolt rope sets into a lip on the front of the hatch opening.  The ‘soft’ hatch is considerably larger than the opening.  With this hatch the sheets, tack line and halyard exit out the back therefore water does not have a direct path into the boat.  The technical drawings of this design put my mind at ease.  FYD has thought this concept out.

 

As for the engine, my days of putting my way out to the race course are over.  I’ve sailed plenty on “race” boats that had undersized engines, props or both in my 30 years of racing experience.  I’ve hand-cranked a single lung BMW inboard more times than I care to remember.  Yes, Virgina you can hand crank a diesel with a compression by-pass switch, get the flywheel going fast enough and BAM it starts…  And I’ve hauled a 9.9 Evercrude outboard off of the back of a boat (by myself) also more times than I care to remember, from various 30 footers I have raced on.  

 

At this point in my life, time is important to me as I have a family and when I have a hall pass to go racing, I want to spend it on the race course, sailing in the conditions I will be racing in not traveling there or back…  This is not to say that other people’s time is somehow less important, just that I accept the compromises that this engine requires.

 

I’m not drinking the water from the FYD cooler, nor am I an employee, just a regular guy that wants to race fast boats, preferably in a tightly controlled OD class.  In total, the 280 checks nearly all the boxes for me.

 

Christian, I know you are near Annapolis as am I, feel free to PM me with questions or we can grab a some beers at the Boatyard.



#151 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 09 March 2014 - 06:14 PM

For similar price, you can get the C&C30 designed by Mark Mills. You may not get the Farr OD sticker and (advertised) tightly controlled OD class, but overall, it looks like a better realization of this concept. Unless you can get 5-6 of your friends to buy the Farr280, you are still stuck racing phrf, so might as well not worry about the OD aspect and just get the superior boat. The C&C is longer, about the same displacement (and all the increase is in ballast), more relative sail area (and due to all this, in most all conditions will most likely be faster), is built for Cat3 right out, has more interior volume, etc.. Now, granted, the C&C is still basically vaporware, until they build one and get it sailing, but to me, that is the boat Farr should have built. Size matters....

 

Like I said, the Farr280 has a lot going for it, and maybe for your area, your sailing, etc. it's the perfect mix. Doesn't work for me though, if I was buying a boat in this price range I would go for the C&C 30 over this.



#152 TBone

TBone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 352 posts

Posted 09 March 2014 - 06:34 PM

Fixed keel in this size range is stupid and exclude drysailing in many venues (and trailering is a PITA compared to a lift keel boat).


"Stupid" is a bit harsh; shortsighted for certain.

#153 postpast

postpast

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 276 posts
  • Location:North Toronto
  • Interests:Old Cars, Old Heavy Equipment, Sailing, Fixing Sail Boats,

Posted 10 March 2014 - 01:17 AM

I totally “get” this boat.  It looks to me about having a sport boat without the pain. The fixed keel and bowsprit help keep things simple for the owners who want to walk down the dock onto their sport boat and go sailing. I see the target market for this boat to be the ones who value there time highly and aren’t likely be the ones who load the boat themselves onto trailers and drive across the country. They also don’t want headaches.

Some headaches that this boat eliminates:

·         Having the engine act up.

·         Trying to motor upwind and being slowed to 3 knots because of weather.

·         Having to worry and work about getting at least 5 crew because there is wind and the boat won’t perform without rail meat.

·         Having to think about asking crew to stay on the dock because there is light wind and there will be a real performance difference between 4 and 7 people.

·         Being totally reliant on a skilled bowman because of the large A sail.  

A lot of us probably see these as normal parts of racing. I think a person looking to spend 100G’s to race a  100 hours a year may see these factors as crucial things they want to avoid in order to enjoy racing sailboats.

This boat gives the Farr name as while as the sport boat look and performance. If it saves someone would values their time at $200 an hour,50 hours a season, then it is a really good value indeed.  

I may be wrong on my understanding of this boat, but I think this is the marketing pitch they are using to grab the customers looking to spend over 100G’s on a “toy”. I have to commend Farr on the straight forward and informative posts that they give on this site, what a difference from a lot of the amateur builders that post aggressive or  misleading replies to the first sign of criticism. 



#154 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 10 March 2014 - 02:21 AM

A well maintained modern outboard is very reliable.

An appropriately sized outboard, with correct prop and leg gearing, will push a boat this size upwind in shit weather easily.

Most issues with outboards stem from people cheaping out and getting the smallest, lightest engine that might move their boat in flat water and no breeze, or not maintaining it. 

 

No matter what Farr's marketing department says, body weight will still be critical for performance in light or heavy breeze.

 

It sounds more and more like it is being pitched as the transition boat for leadmine owners looking to move into the sporty side of things, but afraid to go the whole hog with a viper or melges. 



#155 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 10 March 2014 - 03:03 AM

A well maintained modern outboard is very reliable.

An appropriately sized outboard, with correct prop and leg gearing, will push a boat this size upwind in shit weather easily.

Most issues with outboards stem from people cheaping out and getting the smallest, lightest engine that might move their boat in flat water and no breeze, or not maintaining it. 

 

.

Reliable- check

Applying power- check

Too small, too light, etc- check

 

Prop comes out of the water in a chop... oops

No way to fix that except put the sails up, or get a bigger boat with an inboard to tow you.

 

I'm amazed that so may people are so vehement about having such a basic lack of seamanship. Besides, you hate the diesel, don't friggin' buy one. No need to endlessly crank out spiteful posts about how much smarter you are for not wanting one.

 

FB- Doug



#156 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 10 March 2014 - 03:57 AM

 

A well maintained modern outboard is very reliable.

An appropriately sized outboard, with correct prop and leg gearing, will push a boat this size upwind in shit weather easily.

Most issues with outboards stem from people cheaping out and getting the smallest, lightest engine that might move their boat in flat water and no breeze, or not maintaining it. 

 

.

Reliable- check

Applying power- check

Too small, too light, etc- check

 

Prop comes out of the water in a chop... oops

No way to fix that except put the sails up, or get a bigger boat with an inboard to tow you.

 

I'm amazed that so may people are so vehement about having such a basic lack of seamanship. Besides, you hate the diesel, don't friggin' buy one. No need to endlessly crank out spiteful posts about how much smarter you are for not wanting one.

 

FB- Doug

I should have specified it as well mounted too, with a nice bomber door to fit in there when racing. Permanent fuel tank, remote controls, electric start. When it is designed from the start and implemented well, it works very well. If the boat was designed as an offshore Cat 1/2 boat, then diesel would make sense, but it is being marketed as an inshore boat that can be taken up to Cat 3 with some optional extras. Compared with nearly every other sportsboat discussed here, it is overkill.

If the intended market is people downsizing from a big boat background, the diesel, fixed keel and kite retrieval system make a heap of sense, a small MC38, not a big sportsboat. If Farr has picked their intended market right, then this thing might end up huge.



#157 familysailor

familysailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,543 posts
  • Location:San Francisco Bay

Posted 10 March 2014 - 04:04 AM

So what problems carry over or result in using the SSC 27 system of deploying and using an outboard?

It seems that using a Lehr propane fueled, electric start unit would take care of the stinky fuel issue. Deploying ahead of the rudder removes the cavitation at the stern issue.

Not sure how the moon pool door flap works in the bottom of the hull... also wondering how excess water is removed.

Should be less weight and expense than an inboard...



#158 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 10 March 2014 - 07:02 PM

 

A well maintained modern outboard is very reliable.

An appropriately sized outboard, with correct prop and leg gearing, will push a boat this size upwind in shit weather easily.

Most issues with outboards stem from people cheaping out and getting the smallest, lightest engine that might move their boat in flat water and no breeze, or not maintaining it. 

 

.

Reliable- check

Applying power- check

Too small, too light, etc- check

 

Prop comes out of the water in a chop... oops

No way to fix that except put the sails up, or get a bigger boat with an inboard to tow you.

 

I'm amazed that so may people are so vehement about having such a basic lack of seamanship. Besides, you hate the diesel, don't friggin' buy one. No need to endlessly crank out spiteful posts about how much smarter you are for not wanting one.

 

FB- Doug

 

I like diesel a lot. All I've said is my own personal view is that for a small around the cans boat of this size, a diesel is overkill. An outboard in a well is also overkill. Basic seamanship to me means you don't need the aux to get your boat someplace in a chop, you know how to use the sails to do that.

 

But hey, whatever. It's a free country, people can spend their money as they like without any of our approval, and there is a lot to like about this boat. For the money, I like the C&C better.

wev,



#159 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 10 March 2014 - 07:10 PM

I should have specified it as well mounted too, with a nice bomber door to fit in there when racing. Permanent fuel tank, remote controls, electric start. When it is designed from the start and implemented well, it works very well. 

Yeah, because outboards do great sitting in a swamp.  After a season of racing M32 all over the caribbean and almost endless outboard issues thanks to the whole 'well' concept, I'm in the 'no thanks' camp on that one.  



#160 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 10 March 2014 - 10:49 PM

I should have specified it as well mounted too, with a nice bomber door to fit in there when racing. Permanent fuel tank, remote controls, electric start. When it is designed from the start and implemented well, it works very well. 

Yeah, because outboards do great sitting in a swamp.  After a season of racing M32 all over the caribbean and almost endless outboard issues thanks to the whole 'well' concept, I'm in the 'no thanks' camp on that one.  

I guess it depends on the implementation. My experience has been with Aus trailer sailers, and has generally been good. 

Would you prefer the extra weight of a diesel in the M32, or dealing with the outboard issues you had?



#161 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 11 March 2014 - 02:06 AM

 

.... ....

I'm amazed that so may people are so vehement about having such a basic lack of seamanship. Besides, you hate the diesel, don't friggin' buy one. No need to endlessly crank out spiteful posts about how much smarter you are for not wanting one.

 

 

 

I like diesel a lot. All I've said is my own personal view is that for a small around the cans boat of this size, a diesel is overkill. An outboard in a well is also overkill. Basic seamanship to me means you don't need the aux to get your boat someplace in a chop, you know how to use the sails to do that.

 

But hey, whatever. It's a free country, people can spend their money as they like without any of our approval, and there is a lot to like about this boat. For the money, I like the C&C better.

wev,

 

Around the cans in mild weather on sheltered water. A lot of places you can't sail in & out of, try it some time at a place like St Augustine or Manasquan. Even if it is physically possible to sail in, which sometimes it's not because of constricted channels and current, you would be at serious risk from all the motorboat traffic who ain't gonna give no fucks.

 

I see the diesel as expensive, a luxury (and that's partly the image Farr is probably going for), and adding another layer of serious capability to the boat. Yeah you can push a boat along with an outboard but it is a delusion to think it's just as good. And yeah I have a strong dislike for outboards in wells too... big benefit there is getting the prop out of the water.

 

All that aside, I'm not a likely buyer for a boat like this.

 

FB- Doug



#162 rantifarian

rantifarian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Location:Central Queensland

Posted 11 March 2014 - 06:58 AM

A bit of a spiel from Farr on the FP. more about explaining the farr design spiral than anything new about the boat, but very interesting none the less

http://sailinganarch...3/10/numbers-2/



#163 Trickypig

Trickypig

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,673 posts

Posted 11 March 2014 - 09:22 AM

 

I should have specified it as well mounted too, with a nice bomber door to fit in there when racing. Permanent fuel tank, remote controls, electric start. When it is designed from the start and implemented well, it works very well. 

Yeah, because outboards do great sitting in a swamp.  After a season of racing M32 all over the caribbean and almost endless outboard issues thanks to the whole 'well' concept, I'm in the 'no thanks' camp on that one.  

I guess it depends on the implementation. My experience has been with Aus trailer sailers, and has generally been good. 

Would you prefer the extra weight of a diesel in the M32, or dealing with the outboard issues you had?

I'm with you ranter..

 

Planing sport boats and keelboats get a truckload of drag out of a sail drive or shaft/prop. Especially in smaller boats and that's why sports boats (with no sail drive) can do a some silverware burgling in moderate air against bigger boats.

 

Personally if I'm going to race a boat and be fast in mixed company I don't care if an outboard/well is the penalty for planing in the lower wind ranges.. 

 

Even if a boat has a sail drive they are still faster to sail home anyway. An MC38 in 8 knots of breeze is still faster sailed than motored.



#164 Yard Dog

Yard Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD

Posted 11 March 2014 - 01:26 PM

The 280 has a Facebook page at:

https://www.facebook.com/FarrTwoEighty

#165 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 12 March 2014 - 03:43 PM



#166 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,298 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:40 PM

 

A well maintained modern outboard is very reliable.

An appropriately sized outboard, with correct prop and leg gearing, will push a boat this size upwind in shit weather easily.

Most issues with outboards stem from people cheaping out and getting the smallest, lightest engine that might move their boat in flat water and no breeze, or not maintaining it. 

 

.

Reliable- check

Applying power- check

Too small, too light, etc- check

 

Prop comes out of the water in a chop... oops

No way to fix that except put the sails up, or get a bigger boat with an inboard to tow you.

 

I'm amazed that so may people are so vehement about having such a basic lack of seamanship. Besides, you hate the diesel, don't friggin' buy one. No need to endlessly crank out spiteful posts about how much smarter you are for not wanting one.

 

FB- Doug

 

What the ?????

 

I switched my 2 ton displacement 28 footer from a 12.5hp inboard to a Tohatsu 9.8 outboard extra long shaft, centrally transom mounted. Cavitation is next to non-existent and has never been a problem. The boat will motor as fast upwind under the outboard as it did under the diesel, even in conditions where the #4 alone has been too much sail, because the outboard can swing a three-bladed fixed prop which is impractical on a diesel.

 

After doing 5 Sydney-Hobarts and a bunch of other offshore stuff I think I've got a basic grip of seamanship, and I'm quite happy with the outboard offshore. Sure, an eggbeater mounted to one side of a transom is problematic, but that doesn't apply to all boats.



#167 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,637 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 March 2014 - 12:31 AM

 

 

A well maintained modern outboard is very reliable.

An appropriately sized outboard, with correct prop and leg gearing, will push a boat this size upwind in shit weather easily.

Most issues with outboards stem from people cheaping out and getting the smallest, lightest engine that might move their boat in flat water and no breeze, or not maintaining it. 

 

.

Reliable- check

Applying power- check

Too small, too light, etc- check

 

Prop comes out of the water in a chop... oops

No way to fix that except put the sails up, or get a bigger boat with an inboard to tow you.

 

I'm amazed that so may people are so vehement about having such a basic lack of seamanship. Besides, you hate the diesel, don't friggin' buy one. No need to endlessly crank out spiteful posts about how much smarter you are for not wanting one.

 

FB- Doug

 

What the ?????

 

I switched my 2 ton displacement 28 footer from a 12.5hp inboard to a Tohatsu 9.8 outboard extra long shaft, centrally transom mounted. Cavitation is next to non-existent and has never been a problem. The boat will motor as fast upwind under the outboard as it did under the diesel, even in conditions where the #4 alone has been too much sail, because the outboard can swing a three-bladed fixed prop which is impractical on a diesel.

 

After doing 5 Sydney-Hobarts and a bunch of other offshore stuff I think I've got a basic grip of seamanship, and I'm quite happy with the outboard offshore. Sure, an eggbeater mounted to one side of a transom is problematic, but that doesn't apply to all boats.

 

Congrats

 

Your case is the first I've ever heard of... including motorboats... where outboard power doesn't have the problem of pitching the prop out when the chop gets bad enough. My bad for implying that it is a universal problem.

 

Now I want to hear somebody say they sail in & out of Manasquan Inlet against the current with weekend fishing traffic.

 

FB- Doug



#168 dasher12

dasher12

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:east coast
  • Interests:racing

Posted 19 March 2014 - 05:46 PM

I see one is registered for Charleston Race Week. I haven't seen any actual photos of the boat being built or anything.... Farr website just has renderings... is the boat actually going to show?

 

http://www.yachtscor...eet.cfm?eID=968

 

It would be nice to see the Anarchy 30 aka (C&C), GP 26, Farr 280, Viper 830, Farr 30, Melges 32 all in the same class....

Curious if the boat shows too as i haven't seen any pictures. Farr however has uploaded some videos to their YouTube channel in the past couple weeks showing deck and hull construction. Check it out. 

 

http://www.youtube.c...FarrYachtDesign



#169 Yard Dog

Yard Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD

Posted 19 March 2014 - 07:00 PM

I've talked to Farr about the design and it will be at Charleston. Several good local sailors who know of my interest in the design are signed on to sail in Charleston. A reputable local rigger is putting together running rigging for the boat. I talked to him yesterday. The boat is expected at Jabins within the next two weeks, and there is a perspective owners meeting at AYC on April 2. There is a lot scheduled for the boat for it not to show.

Farr had a relationship with Waterline to build the boat--the same Waterline that is building the C&C 30--and there was a perceived conflict of interest that led Farr to contract with Premier. The was also some concern that revealing too much was aiding the competition so Farr has been circumspect about releasing details.

That's all there is to it.

#170 SA Lurker

SA Lurker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 475 posts

Posted 19 March 2014 - 08:28 PM

The was also some concern that revealing too much was aiding the competition so Farr has been circumspect about releasing details.
 

 

Quite prudent.



#171 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 20 March 2014 - 12:40 PM



#172 Yard Dog

Yard Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD

Posted 20 March 2014 - 05:06 PM

Apologies are tiresome and you probably caught it anyway, but I meant Watercraft instead of Waterline as the C&C 30 builder.  My bad. 



#173 dasher12

dasher12

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:east coast
  • Interests:racing

Posted 20 March 2014 - 06:53 PM

I've talked to Farr about the design and it will be at Charleston. Several good local sailors who know of my interest in the design are signed on to sail in Charleston. A reputable local rigger is putting together running rigging for the boat. I talked to him yesterday. The boat is expected at Jabins within the next two weeks, and there is a perspective owners meeting at AYC on April 2. There is a lot scheduled for the boat for it not to show.

Farr had a relationship with Waterline to build the boat--the same Waterline that is building the C&C 30--and there was a perceived conflict of interest that led Farr to contract with Premier. The was also some concern that revealing too much was aiding the competition so Farr has been circumspect about releasing details.

That's all there is to it.

Thanks for the info Yard Dog. Keep us in the loop.



#174 Trickypig

Trickypig

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,673 posts

Posted 21 March 2014 - 02:24 AM

I'm still trying to get what market niche they're aiming for. 

 

One design… yes it could be good at this although the Melges already dominates the market and would be a faster boat.

 

Sportsboat… It isn't one; the diesel/sail drive makes sure of that.

 

IRC… Dunno but small IRC boats struggle.

 

Club level PHRF… this area of sailing is dominated with cruiser/racers or cheaper hand me down race boats with new rag.



#175 Yard Dog

Yard Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD

Posted 21 March 2014 - 03:29 AM

TP, I think I understand your question. OD is hoped for, but that remains to be seen. I agree that its not a sport boat. The design differs from anything Melges has to offer in its form stability, among other things. I looked hard at the M 20 and 32 when they came out and couldn't pull the trigger. Do you remember that Sailing World article of a few years ago choreographing how each crew member should move on a M 32 during a gybe? It was right out of Arthur Murray. The boat is so weight sensitive that if you do it wrong you lose boat lengths.

Someone described the 280 as a scaled down McConaghy 38. I can see that. IRC? Probably not. PHRF? Well, that's a problem for most new boats. For what its worth, HPR is looking at the 280 and C&C 30.

Farr described the design as a modernized Mumm/Farr 30 which they think there is a market for. In other words, they are going after performance, but not at the extremes and not with all the compromises J makes. There are good sailors here who downsized from forty footers to the F30, but now are looking for something more modern.

Downsizing is evident everywhere you look. I was a 40 guy for a long time, but those boats have disappeared locally, and look what showed up at KWRW and what signed up for Charleston. I don't know if the market is looking for a performance boat in the 30 foot range that can be sailed by four or five and can be trailered, but I am.

#176 Trickypig

Trickypig

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,673 posts

Posted 21 March 2014 - 03:47 AM

TP, I think I understand your question. OD is hoped for, but that remains to be seen. I agree that its not a sport boat. The design differs from anything Melges has to offer in its form stability, among other things. I looked hard at the M 20 and 32 when they came out and couldn't pull the trigger. Do you remember that Sailing World article of a few years ago choreographing how each crew member should move on a M 32 during a gybe? It was right out of Arthur Murray. The boat is so weight sensitive that if you do it wrong you lose boat lengths.

Someone described the 280 as a scaled down McConaghy 38. I can see that. IRC? Probably not. PHRF? Well, that's a problem for most new boats. For what its worth, HPR is looking at the 280 and C&C 30.

Farr described the design as a modernized Mumm/Farr 30 which they think there is a market for. In other words, they are going after performance, but not at the extremes and not with all the compromises J makes. There are good sailors here who downsized from forty footers to the F30, but now are looking for something more modern.

Downsizing is evident everywhere you look. I was a 40 guy for a long time, but those boats have disappeared locally, and look what showed up at KWRW and what signed up for Charleston. I don't know if the market is looking for a performance boat in the 30 foot range that can be sailed by four or five and can be trailered, but I am.

 

I think what you are saying, YD, is that one design may be its best shot. The Mumm 30s were a great boat from the mid 90s and had no peer, the 280 certainly updates that a lot. I can't help thinking that other designs are `stealing a march' on what has been the Farr office's turf; fast one design keelboat sailing.

 

There will be nearly as many Arthur Murray skills in getting a 280 around the race track as a Melges 32. Giving the 280 a little more weight and form stability will only remove the odd `quickstep' but it'll be much the same; but slower downhill speeds with the sail drive.

 

I just can't see the vision; but having said that… Farr's (Stagg's?) marketing and regatta management could still bring it off.

 

As far as a 280 being a small MC38…. well you know what I think of that.  ;)



#177 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 25 March 2014 - 07:05 AM



#178 Murphness

Murphness

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, Brewing Beer, Drinking Beer, Skiing and other outsidey things

Posted 25 March 2014 - 10:48 AM

Watched that last night. Boat looks awesome! Finish is really nice and build quality looks fantastic (from a self published video at least).

Can't wait to see how it performs!

Congrats to the owner!

P.s. I really like the black hull with white trim... Hopefully it's not too hot.

#179 Savage 17

Savage 17

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 12:10 PM

Watched that last night. Boat looks awesome! Finish is really nice and build quality looks fantastic (from a self published video at least).

Can't wait to see how it performs!

Congrats to the owner!

P.s. I really like the black hull with white trim... Hopefully it's not too hot.

Murphy - the owner works for Farr - Ian Gordon.... He talked about it earlier in the thread. It should be interesting to see how the boat does at Charleston and then other big regattas this year. PHRF rating is 45, which puts it in line with a Henderson 30 base rating.



#180 Yard Dog

Yard Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD

Posted 03 April 2014 - 05:14 AM

Well, the 280 cleared customs and is in the states as of last weekend, but Farr bypassed an Annapolis stop and presentation to get the boat down to Charleston where it will be rigged and prepped and splashed for practices prior to CRW. Time was just too short to do everything, but CRW is the big tell anyway.

#181 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 03 April 2014 - 06:10 AM

Excellent!  i'm going sailing then!



#182 dasher12

dasher12

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:east coast
  • Interests:racing

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:15 PM

any pics of it rigged down in Charleston?? would love to see it.



#183 Savage 17

Savage 17

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:20 PM

check facebook they put some up yesterday.



#184 Left Hook

Left Hook

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,026 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:09 PM

Literally a whole day sailing and only 3 photos are posted - only 1 showing the whole picture. Bit of a departure from a new photo ever day during the build process.... 

 

10175053_386510531489416_449661125522333

 

10257888_386510541489415_208444986874286

 

1557445_386510544822748_5989860834646715



#185 dasher12

dasher12

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:east coast
  • Interests:racing

Posted 09 April 2014 - 12:17 AM

Agree with Left Hook, not really showing us much here. Would prefer to just see a normal non-artsy picture of the whole boat sailing...



#186 DJL

DJL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 245 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada
  • Interests:Sailing. Olson 30s. Sailing Olson 30s.

Posted 09 April 2014 - 05:46 AM

USA 17? Really? Isn't that taken?

#187 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 09 April 2014 - 05:54 AM

Literally a whole day sailing and only 3 photos are posted - only 1 showing the whole picture. Bit of a departure from a new photo ever day during the build process.... 

 

10175053_386510531489416_449661125522333

 

10257888_386510541489415_208444986874286

 

1557445_386510544822748_5989860834646715

 

 

any pics of it rigged down in Charleston?? would love to see it.

We'll be on the water for a few shots of practice tomorrow, and I suspect a fairly long video walkthrough as well, if not here than on CRW Facebook page (no, you don't have to have a FB account to see).  



#188 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 09 April 2014 - 08:02 AM

From the CRW fb page.

 

10257990_10152096856484895_1223047664201



#189 Murphness

Murphness

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, Brewing Beer, Drinking Beer, Skiing and other outsidey things

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:18 AM

Is the plan to just not go forward of the mast in anything lumpy? What does the bowman hold on to when you're coming into a chopped up top mark?

 

Good luck to whoever has that job this week if the Farr is racing in the offshore course...

 

Boat looks nice though!



#190 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,022 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 10 April 2014 - 03:43 AM

Boat looks good in the water. A lot less freeboard than I expected. Was the right plan to go straight to CRW. Never enough time when first getting sorted, though. Hopefully you can get it up to speed quickly, because that has been such an unfair bust on so many boats.

#191 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 10 April 2014 - 06:40 AM

10153672_10152098850089895_8703225240353

 

10173531_676745552382919_105379451910743



#192 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,642 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 10 April 2014 - 07:34 AM

 

Not sure about the music choice..



#193 teleboxAUT118

teleboxAUT118

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Location:kiel

Posted 10 April 2014 - 08:02 AM

 

curious to see how she will be doing in some chop or in larger breeze offshore... if the boat is meant to be the next mumm 30 then this is the benchmark media wise:

 



#194 steveromagnino

steveromagnino

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,481 posts
  • Location:Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 10 April 2014 - 12:13 PM

Is the plan to just not go forward of the mast in anything lumpy? What does the bowman hold on to when you're coming into a chopped up top mark?

 

Good luck to whoever has that job this week if the Farr is racing in the offshore course...

 

Boat looks nice though!

At a guess, they are thinking to just sail it like a sportsboat, and everything happens from inside the cockpit, except even easier since there is no prod to extend and the boat anyhow has the form stability of a small keelboat even if there isn't much to hang onto.  You leave the jib up the whole time as appears in these pics, and try to make sure there are no massive disasters requiring dudes jumping around on the bow.

 

I am not a bigger boat sailor, but I don't know what else you would need to go fwd to do, all the control lines surely come into the cockpit, the kite goes up and down from control lines in the cockpit, and so the only other things are handling the headsail, but you pick one, and use that per race for the most part?  If we can swap jibs on a 6.5m sportsboat that weighs a fair bit less than this boat, then surely they can handle the logistics between races to do the same?



#195 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 12:48 PM

Now that there are pictures of the Farr 280 sailing I think I finally understand the concept.

It's an American version of the larger sportsboats like the Thompson 8 or the Stealth 8.5. Of course, it would be twice the weight of the Stealth and it's got a 20hp diesel instead of a small outboard, but maybe that's what the market likes.

After all, we're talking about a country where the J70 is wildly popular.

But I don't see it as a modern version of a Mumm/Farr 30 which is much more offshore capable.

#196 Just a Skosh

Just a Skosh

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Location:DC
  • Interests:sailing, backpacking

Posted 10 April 2014 - 02:39 PM

Would like to see video of a takedown, if something requires the bow guy to go up forward it's most likely that.  Only one headsail listed on their spec sheet/promo website, so no changes necessary.



#197 Murphness

Murphness

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, Brewing Beer, Drinking Beer, Skiing and other outsidey things

Posted 10 April 2014 - 02:42 PM

Steve: After seeing the video it makes slightly more sense. I really don't see what drawback a carbon pulpit would add though? If something gets jammed or tangled (usually in heavier air) someone is going to have to go to the bow... Also, no video of a take down yet. Interested to see how that goes.

 

Aside from that, the boat looks great. They're in a tough class though with most boats being at least 5-6' longer. Medium air will be a good test. Can they get up on a plane in 12 knots? I doubt it. Guessing they're gonna struggle with that this week...

 

We'll find out tomorrow!

 

Cheers,

 

Murphness



#198 trimfast

trimfast

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 115 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 03:27 PM

Would like to see video of a takedown, if something requires the bow guy to go up forward it's most likely that.  Only one headsail listed on their spec sheet/promo website, so no changes necessary.

 

They are running a take down system. If done "properly", no reason to go forward of the mast as it just gets sucked in with the retrieval line.  Their bow guy is also top notch, standing up there won't be a problem.



#199 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 10 April 2014 - 05:39 PM

There are inshore stanchions and offshore stanchions for those who want to take it to Bermuda.  Boat looks very nice, and moved well - semi-planing, about 10 knots in 12 knots yesterday afternoon.

 

Petey got some vid that will make it into tonight's preview/highlight reel 



#200 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 10 April 2014 - 05:47 PM

perfect 16 knots right now, going out to shoot






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users