Jump to content

Older well known IOR Boats


Recommended Posts

On 3/18/2019 at 3:46 AM, stumblingthunder said:

I still have my father's Peter Storm oiled sweater, in burnt orange.   65+ yo sweater that has survived two generations of sailing use, still is in good shape!

Like a cockroach, it will survive the Apocalypse, still repelling water and keeping the skeleton chest warm and cozy!

(unfortunately, the Line 7's did not last quite as long)

- Stumbling

I think you really meant "fortunately".  Never has one article of clothing made more people freezing-ass cold and soaking wet, without leaking.

Probably I have one rolled up in my basement if you're desperate to relive those days.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Me too.  A blooper gybe right outside the StFYC is a thing of beauty for the spectators on the roof.  Unless it's not.

I do remember a fine comment from a bow guy on Williwaw in the Admiral's Cup, 1981 I think.  Dennis Conner was driving, and he loved double-head rigs, and sometimes triple-head with two staysails.  Th

Bob Perry posted an article a couple of years back that I think is a really good overview of the IOR system.  Posting here with his permission.... Time to sit up straight and spit your gum out. W

Posted Images

23 hours ago, FINS said:

google Bermuda Overboard.

 I have it on VHS somewhere....

https://www.worldcat.org/title/bermuda-overboard/oclc/29783413

 

 

gettyimages-975340106-2048x2048.jpg

 

Pretty sure that is Intuition in the background of the last photo of Sam Jones, so it couldn't have been that boat that he was on???  I was on another Holland boat that year, Infinity with John Thompson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Left Shift said:

I think you really meant "fortunately".  Never has one article of clothing made more people freezing-ass cold and soaking wet, without leaking.

Probably I have one rolled up in my basement if you're desperate to relive those days.

I upgraded to Henri’s as soon as I could afford it back then.  Am currently in search of a good replacement, as my 35+ yo foul weather gear is no longer as dry as I would like, even with treatments.  Would buy another set, but Henri is now a fashion boutique after their “reorganization “.....

- Stumbling 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, stumblingthunder said:

I upgraded to Henri’s as soon as I could afford it back then.  Am currently in search of a good replacement, as my 35+ yo foul weather gear is no longer as dry as I would like, even with treatments.  Would buy another set, but Henri is now a fashion boutique after their “reorganization “.....

- Stumbling 

 

Try Defender online

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stumblingthunder said:

I upgraded to Henri’s as soon as I could afford it back then.  Am currently in search of a good replacement, as my 35+ yo foul weather gear is no longer as dry as I would like, even with treatments.  Would buy another set, but Henri is now a fashion boutique after their “reorganization “.....

- Stumbling 

The serious companies have been making some very good stuff.  Currently have a Gill jacket and Musto pants.  I've found that the "Southern Ocean" top of the line stuff isn't needed or even wanted around here.

Don't go on line for three reasons: 

One is that fit matters and you can't check that on-line (like the ability to pee, or have more than one layer, or how the collar and hood really work.)

Second, and most important, we REALLY need to support our local marine stores.  Yeah, yeah, you pay a little more, but you also have a resource for replacing that widget that just broke so you can go sailing on a Saturday afternoon. 

Third, Talking to local sailors behind the counter or just shopping like you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, billy backstay said:

Pretty sure that is Intuition in the background of the last photo of Sam Jones, so it couldn't have been that boat that he was on???  I was on another Holland boat that year, Infinity with John Thompson.

Pretty sure that what he's "on" in that last photo is the dock.  So... probably doesn't remove the possibility that it was Intuition he was on when it *left* the dock..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Say what you want about the flaws of the IOR, there has seldom been a rule or an era that produced more beautiful boats.

image.png.c24329a7c86278a3400a256e22affeb4.pngimage.png.f791249e4d01a12fbe2e1f6ea10ddeb7.png

Beautiful is subjective. I agree, compared to IMS and more modern box rule boats, the IOR rule did produce some pretty yachts.(it also produced some God awful ugly ones as well)

But, I can think of more than a few rating rules which produced on average more beautiful yachts. International rule, J class, 6, 8 and 12 Meter rules, CCA just to name a few. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, those 6 meter's are really something.

image.png.b520bd50c9d250054141612ba25188d0.png

What I'm not sure - but something.

I mean compare that lumpy thing to the artistry of a Stephen Jones IOR boat. ;)

 

Jones Freak.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Yeah, those 6 meter's are really something.

image.png.b520bd50c9d250054141612ba25188d0.png

What I'm not sure - but something.

I mean compare that lumpy thing to the artistry of a Stephen Jones IOR boat. ;)

 

Jones Freak.jpg

Look at that belly on that bitch

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ROADKILL666 said:

Look at that belly on that bitch

Jones boats: Just because you can design a 33 foot half tonner doesn't mean you should...

Having said that I raced one of his one tonners back in the day and it was a sweet boat

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DickDastardly said:

Jones boats: Just because you can design a 33 foot half tonner doesn't mean you should...

Having said that I raced one of his one tonners back in the day and it was a sweet boat

Not all his boats were rule beating freaks.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jones boats typically sailed quite nicely from all accounts I've read.  He was doing wide ass sterns long before Farr and the other kiwis. 

I recall a blustery winter race that was abandoned so Pachena III ('81 Peterson 41) and Dream Machine (Jones 44) had an impromptu drag race from the Kits barge buoy and Pachena had a spectacular wipeout just off the Royal Van docks and Dream Machine carried on by stable as a rock.

Jones early designs (i.e. circa 1973) had a lot of distortions and unusual shapes, but as a teen I still thought boats like Odd Job and the appropriately named Tumblehome 2 shown in the photo upthread were cool looking boats -other than the tumblehome part, but that was very common in 1973, i.e. Ranger 37.

Some of his 80's designs were very good looking boats and more than a few people consider his wooden One Ton Rakau to be one of the most beautiful IOR designs ever built, although the bright finish and parquet transom may have had a lot to do with that..  The 3/4 Ton Lion was another one.

1981 05 Seahorse Rakau.jpg

Rakaua.jpg

1989 05 Bx Rakau.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, daan62 said:

a woman with a nose like that would be send to a docter for a nose job...

I guess Jim Young and Lock Crowther never got the message.

Oddly enough, a lot of people on here had a real hard on for the bow on the Crowther multi in one of the R2AK threads IIRC.  Below are some profile photos of Tumblehome 2 for comparison (for those who didn't click on the above link)

Heatwave bow.jpg

20170305_091549.thumb.jpg.ea2d1e9738f9f7a895afa1f897e164d7.jpg

imagedisplay1.jpg

imagedisplay2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, sledracr said:
23 hours ago, billy backstay said:

Pretty sure that is Intuition in the background of the last photo of Sam Jones, so it couldn't have been that boat that he was on???  I was on another Holland boat that year, Infinity with John Thompson.

Pretty sure that what he's "on" in that last photo is the dock.  So... probably doesn't remove the possibility that it was Intuition he was on when it *left* the dock..

he rode on the red boat with malloy

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 12 metre said:

Jones boats typically sailed quite nicely from all accounts I've read.  He was doing wide ass sterns long before Farr and the other kiwis. 

I recall a blustery winter race that was abandoned so Pachena III ('81 Peterson 41) and Dream Machine (Jones 44) had an impromptu drag race from the Kits barge buoy and Pachena had a spectacular wipeout just off the Royal Van docks and Dream Machine carried on by stable as a rock.

Yeah but Dream Machine was unforgivably ugly. and Pachena was gorgeous - well except for that bland colour. Beauty sometimes demands sacrifice. ;)image.thumb.png.bfbb3e661d9316e75489edd75284a9c9.png

Did you see that Wink Vogel died last week?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Somebody Else said:

He did, however, set close to the high-water mark of freakish distortions.

Milgram took the gold in that contest.

image.thumb.png.f6237675fda87d0d6d99521f8969af27.png

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

Yeah but Dream Machine was unforgivably ugly. and Pachena was gorgeous - well except for that bland colour. Beauty sometimes demands sacrifice. ;)image.thumb.png.bfbb3e661d9316e75489edd75284a9c9.png

Did you see that Wink Vogel died last week?

Ya, unfortunately, he did. Dream Machine had always odd lines like most Jones designs. He made it up with Mad Max and the Riptide 50 Strum. Great guy and a real gentleman. I'll miss him:   https://vancouversunandprovince.remembering.ca/obituary/wink-vogel-1078890430?fbclid=IwAR3crZIWTXZuuXFRK3492oS2X7-V6qxpyytTWO0gBpaeWfY70L-T4Vs4aeI

Talking to his son, Randy, via Wastebook they haven't set a date for C of L with all that's going on worldwide. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

Yeah but Dream Machine was unforgivably ugly. and Pachena was gorgeous - well except for that bland colour. Beauty sometimes demands sacrifice. ;)image.thumb.png.bfbb3e661d9316e75489edd75284a9c9.png

Did you see that Wink Vogel died last week?

IMO, the main reason Dream Machine was on the unattractive side was because of the bumblebee stripes painted on the stern quarters.  When she was cruisified later in life, they were removed and I think she looks much the better for it - even with the gaudy name graphics she now sports on her topsides.  Her wide beam and high freeboard made for a huge interior when she was cruisified.

I had not heard of Wink's passing.  Only sailed with Wink in one regatta back when he had Dream Machine - the sailing community has lost a very fine man.  

Dream Machine.jpg

Dream Machine 3.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dream Machine was on the unattractive side 

You should work for the diplomatic corps.:D

I always liked those central engine boxes. Best possible access and a sturdy thing to grab or lean against.

IIRC Plavsic did it in Kanata.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I'm up. Talk about odd IOR designs. The 3/4 ton Whiting design "Riotous Assembly". We have arrived for Swiftsure and on to the 3/4 ton worlds at RVicYC.We got there late and it was dark on the docks and looking at some of the boats I knew. Some I knew they were coming ut not expecting that abortion. A lot of WTF??? We looked at it in the morning. Nope....not any prettier. 

003_7.jpg

005_2.jpg

001_33.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd job ... that was a cool boat to my teen age eyes!

I seem to remember that it had an unusually rigged spar. It had uppers that went straight to the gunwale, instead of inboard, so the genoa was entirely inside and un-distorted. Reminded me of how Tornados were rigged, which was reasonable as the beam was close to 50% of LOA. Maybe the mast rotated? Or had a sloppy deck stepped mast that would rotate without apparent intentionally being rotated, a "I didn't mean to do that" rule cheat? Something like that echos in ancient memories. This was 1976 or so. It sailed out of Fairy's, which is where I was racing out of that season.


image.thumb.png.ccd502d803d5ecc26ec9821e31f73255.pngimage.png.ede68213fdf9372ae6498e7edadaa722.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear about Wink, he was a gentleman and great competitor.  Did Admiral's Cup on Pachena w/ John Newton who passed too soon.  Love the PNW memories, those were quite the days.  Sailed the Fabulous Hagar in the 3/4 ton worlds in Victoria.  Screwed the pooch on the mid distance race and Bill Buchan foxed at at a finish on one of the inshore race, otherwise a great regatta.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, 12 metre said:

Jones boats typically sailed quite nicely from all accounts I've read.  He was doing wide ass sterns long before Farr and the other kiwis. 

 

Bruce Farr designed TITUS CANBY which won the New Zealand half ton championship in 1972 and 1974 and she was clearly a wide ass stern.

When did Jones start designing wide sterns?

http://www.farrdesign.com/27.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Terry Hollis said:

Bruce Farr designed TITUS CANBY which won the New Zealand half ton championship in 1972 and 1974 and she was clearly a wide ass stern.

When did Jones start designing wide sterns?

http://www.farrdesign.com/27.html

You make a good point:

Odd Job was '73 and Supernova was '74

In my defence the NZ half ton championship was not the HTC so no one in the Northern hemisphere would have noticed or cared.

Th Northern hemispheres first exposure to Farr was '75 at the QTC in Deauville where the experts laughed at the fat little 45 Deg South and Genie.  One of those "if those guys are right - everyone else is wrong" moments

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2020 at 1:43 AM, Superpipe said:

Now that we all have some time on our hands, could I trouble the SA IOR hive mind?

Back in the day you may remember the ABC Sports show "The American Sportsman" hosted by Curt Gowdy. One weekend you'd see Ernest Borgnine and Jonathan Winters fishing for Marlin and the next you'd see the Smothers Brothers pheasant hunting with Cheryl Tiegs. In 1982, the show ran an episode which sent the actor Sam Jones -- pretty much only known for being Flash Gordon in 1980 -- along for the ride on the Newport- Bermuda Race. Yep... that guy.

As I recall, Sam pretty much spent the whole trip across the stream tied to the rail of a state-of-the-IOR art two-tonner. Off and on, I've looked around for the episode thinking that it would show up on YouTube, but no such luck. Googling around today, I stumbled into the publicity stills taken in Newport at Bannister's Wharf prior to the race. 

For about the last 25 years or so, I had the idea lodged in my mind that the two-tonner was Scarlett O'Hara but by cross-referencing the photos, the boat appears to have red topsides (red transom seen in the background of the photo of Jones seated on the dock).

Any ideas as to what was the boat? Thanks much. (EDIT: Seeing it blown up, it appears to by Intuition -- anybody have any recollections to confirm?)

Full gallery of stills here: shorturl.at/bprCW

5bb40c4420000030000056fb.jpeg

Sam Jones Bermuda Race.jpg

gettyimages-975340106-2048x2048.jpg

In the bottom photo, the boat inside and the boat outside Intuition belonged to my friend Riccardo Deambrosio. Shaitan was a Swan 65 which was his "pad" during regattas, whilst Charrua was the Frers 40 follow up to the disgraced Acadia, when German was determined to prove the boat could rate that low. Pile of lead fwd made her incredibly narrow grooved. I chartered her to John (the Sheriff of Nottingham) Ewart and raced the UK AC trials with him and his friends. The BN came with the boat and Ward Passmore, who later worked for Rip Ripley with Chiquita, is still a great friend. The sheriff had no idea how to treat a "paid hand", when all the rest of the crew were jolly chaps from his social circle. Ward's poor gf Cindy was even more of a challenge to the old gent. He was a gent, just a century behind!. I then sold the boat to Roger Fuller, and she became Lancer (VI I think), with the galloping Major Peter Schofield trying to show he was cleverer than any designer by trying to push the rating even lower, when the boat was crying out for freedom from lead and shit. Without all that crap, at a higher rating, she was great!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 12 metre said:

You make a good point:

Odd Job was '73 and Supernova was '74

In my defence the NZ half ton championship was not the HTC so no one in the Northern hemisphere would have noticed or cared.

Th Northern hemispheres first exposure to Farr was '75 at the QTC in Deauville where the experts laughed at the fat little 45 Deg South and Genie.  One of those "if those guys are right - everyone else is wrong" moments

Titus Canbe, renamed Tohe Candu turned up in Cowes in 74 (I think).  I was racing a Scampi at the time, and we all looked at it and thought "What a funny little boat."  It went on to give the whole UK half-ton fleet (about 50 boats) a good lesson.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, zenmasterfred said:

Sorry to hear about Wink, he was a gentleman and great competitor.  Did Admiral's Cup on Pachena w/ John Newton who passed too soon.  Love the PNW memories, those were quite the days.  Sailed the Fabulous Hagar in the 3/4 ton worlds in Victoria.  Screwed the pooch on the mid distance race and Bill Buchan foxed at at a finish on one of the inshore race, otherwise a great regatta.

Ya, John Newton was a good guy too. He would search me out on the dock where we sailing just to say hello. No ego there! I worked with Wink when he had Mad Max as I was involved with the Delicate Balance 1 ton program with Roy and Barb. We created a Pacific 1 ton Cup one year. Didn't Hagar get a 4th for the 3/4 ton worlds series? Not bad going as everybody that mattered was in that series. Bill Buchan had a bunch of snot-nose kids on Sachem called Jonathan, Charlie and Carl! Didn't know them but I do cameo on Dark Star once and while now. Met one Keith Lorence at that regatta and have been friends since. Still banter back and forth on Wastebook. I understand pooching the middle race in that series as you go out into the Juan de Fuca for any length of time you're going to get it at one point. Swiftsure is a goofy race in the first place!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maxx Baqustae said:

Ya, John Newton was a good guy too. He would search me out on the dock where we sailing just to say hello. No ego there! I worked with Wink when he had Mad Max as I was involved with the Delicate Balance 1 ton program with Roy and Barb. We created a Pacific 1 ton Cup one year. Didn't Hagar get a 4th for the 3/4 ton worlds series? Not bad going as everybody that mattered was in that series. Bill Buchan had a bunch of snot-nose kids on Sachem called Jonathan, Charlie and Carl! Didn't know them but I do cameo on Dark Star once and while now. Met one Keith Lorence at that regatta and have been friends since. Still banter back and forth on Wastebook. I understand pooching the middle race in that series as you go out into the Juan de Fuca for any length of time you're going to get it at one point. Swiftsure is a goofy race in the first place!

Yes, we ended up 4th, one ill timed jibe at the finish line intimidated by my good friend Bill Buchan, he was on port and we were on starboard, my tactician called for a jibe and we gifted him a finish ahead of us.  Kicked us to 4th.  Hagar was great fun, finally had equipment to go head to head with the big boys, built by Bob Cadranell in Seattle was definitely a maxi 3/4 ton, we had to pull every trick out of the IOR measurement tool box to get her to rate.  Later became a Swiftsure short course rocket ship, first to finished that race a number of times and partied with all the wives of the long course sailors.  Did a lot miles with both Buchan brothers including a Soling Olympic campaign with Bill, won the worlds in 1975 but were one boat length off the pace on the first beat in 1976 which was impossible to overcome at the trials.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ROADKILL666 said:

What dis design is she?

Recluta is a fairly early Frers - after he went on his own from S&S.

The other is (I think) a Holland.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It just struck me that the thread title is a bit redundant. The newest IOR boat is 25 years old.

Should we only be discussing boats from the 70's?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 9:26 PM, Snaggletooth said:

Oune of my faveritteste boates evere.........                :)

I was depreste when I sawe herre bening neglectted in Gloustere.  Greate boate.

Despite her sad look in Gloucester for the last decade and a half, her owner really loved her but just got old and was dealing with a his wife’s failing health.   She will be nice and shiny again someday once this epidemic is behind us.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eliboat said:

Despite her sad look in Gloucester for the last decade and a half, her owner really loved her but just got old and was dealing with a his wife’s failing health.   She will be nice and shiny again someday once this epidemic is behind us.  

Gladde to hearre, thack you.                                                       :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 9:25 AM, 12 metre said:

 

imagedisplay1.jpg

 

I had a few rides on Tumblehome with owner Jock Smith during a few EAORA races in the early 80'ies.  Can't remember if it was this one.  Was there a Tumblehome1 ?  It did have the peculiar front end. Any GB East coast (Mersea, Woolverstone, Levington) peeps around?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mccroc said:

I know it's not - but that really looks like a Cavalier 28! Davidson design??

 

Bruce Farr

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

It just struck me that the thread title is a bit redundant. The newest IOR boat is 25 years old.

Should we only be discussing boats from the 70's?

Who built an IOR boat in 1995???

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

O/K, prove my point. :D They're all old, not just older.

Make it 28 or 30 years old.

Allegedly the last Half Tonner was Per Elisa (1992) - so 28 years at most

Interesting article in the RB Sailing Blog about the end of IOR written by Julian Everitt: http://rbsailing.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-end-of-ior.html

He describes how in the Nov 88 meeting of the ITC that an IOR Mk IV was proposed as well as an adoption of IMS.

Among other things Mk IV would have dispensed with the CGF.  While the CGF was well intentioned, it was one the bigger problems with IOR in that it encouraged a high VCG and waterline beam bumps among other idiosyncrasies that evolved out of the CGF .  Also the min 150% overlap would have been dispensed and used actual LP in the RSAT calculation.

Further the AOC would have been amended to not permit any inflections in the area of the AGS and AIGS

He believes that the boats that would have evolved out of IOR MK IV would have been similar to the boats we have today.  But who knows.

Anyways, this is all a moot point since at the Nov 88 meeting it was decided to keep the still flawed Mk IIIA and develop IMS in parallel.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 12 metre said:

Allegedly the last Half Tonner was Per Elisa (1992) - so 28 years at most

Interesting article in the RB Sailing Blog about the end of IOR written by Julian Everitt: http://rbsailing.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-end-of-ior.html

He describes how in the Nov 88 meeting of the ITC that an IOR Mk IV was proposed as well as an adoption of IMS.

Among other things Mk IV would have dispensed with the CGF.  While the CGF was well intentioned, it was one the bigger problems with IOR in that it encouraged a high VCG and waterline beam bumps among other idiosyncrasies that evolved out of the CGF .  Also the min 150% overlap would have been dispensed and used actual LP in the RSAT calculation.

Further the AOC would have been amended to not permit any inflections in the area of the AGS and AIGS

He believes that the boats that would have evolved out of IOR MK IV would have been similar to the boats we have today.  But who knows.

Anyways, this is all a moot point since at the Nov 88 meeting it was decided to keep the still flawed Mk IIIA and develop IMS in parallel.

Which at any rating is a very beautiful piece of music.  

 

And IMS sounded like a good idea, but ultimately ended up making REALLY ugly boats.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Which sounded like a good idea, but ultimately ended up making REALLY ugly boats.  

A truly strange time in sailing watching some old IOR boats beating new IMS boats because of so called rating anomalies....... the discussions in bar were fucking great fun.....  :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, 12 metre said:

Anyways, this is all a moot point since at the Nov 88 meeting it was decided to keep the still flawed Mk IIIA and develop IMS in parallel.

I remember talking with my local measurer around that time, and he said (probably opinion, but a well-informed one) that the proposal died when they started talking about using the IMSs magical measuring wand to input "continuous hullform data" into the IOR mkIV calcs.  Apparently the resulting data would have required such drastic changes to the calcs - or, alternatively, would have resulted in IOR ratings that were so drastically out of alignment with the VPP - that there was no viable way to "make it work". 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Left Shift said:

That looks like a great small family all-purpose boat.  

My Cookson 12m had the same handy bow anchor well.  Very nice little feature.

indeed. nowadays it sports a 2-feet long prodder and an assymetrical kite. still pretty fast and collecting it's share of silverware at club racing level.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sledracr said:

I remember talking with my local measurer around that time, and he said (probably opinion, but a well-informed one) that the proposal died when they started talking about using the IMSs magical measuring wand to input "continuous hullform data" into the IOR mkIV calcs.  Apparently the resulting data would have required such drastic changes to the calcs - or, alternatively, would have resulted in IOR ratings that were so drastically out of alignment with the VPP - that there was no viable way to "make it work". 

 

Well, and as much as the designers, boat builders etc did a great job and deserved (and deserve) a good living, the move to offshore OD was already under way.  There had been attempted regulations to control costs (anyone still have a "Save the Kevlars" T shirt?), and as fun as those times were, design innovations under any design rule resulted in disposable boats.  Probably not a sustainable model even if IOR mk IV had been adopted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 7:19 PM, 12 metre said:

Jones boats typically sailed quite nicely from all accounts I've read.  He was doing wide ass sterns long before Farr and the other kiwis. 

I recall a blustery winter race that was abandoned so Pachena III ('81 Peterson 41) and Dream Machine (Jones 44) had an impromptu drag race from the Kits barge buoy and Pachena had a spectacular wipeout just off the Royal Van docks and Dream Machine carried on by stable as a rock.

Jones early designs (i.e. circa 1973) had a lot of distortions and unusual shapes, but as a teen I still thought boats like Odd Job and the appropriately named Tumblehome 2 shown in the photo upthread were cool looking boats -other than the tumblehome part, but that was very common in 1973, i.e. Ranger 37.

Some of his 80's designs were very good looking boats and more than a few people consider his wooden One Ton Rakau to be one of the most beautiful IOR designs ever built, although the bright finish and parquet transom may have had a lot to do with that..  The 3/4 Ton Lion was another one.

1981 05 Seahorse Rakau.jpg

Rakaua.jpg

1989 05 Bx Rakau.jpg

Lovely boat it was, I raced it in the 83 season.  Owned by a couple of Kiwis hence the name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Trovão said:

indeed. nowadays it sports a 2-feet long prodder and an assymetrical kite. still pretty fast and collecting it's share of silverware at club racing level.

I had fun putting those on there and it seemed to play pretty well with the local big boys.  

Swiftsure 2017 Start.pdf

I sure didn't miss the IOR when we turned the top mark.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brass said:

Can anybody help me with a scan or a link to the IOR rule itself, IOR Mk3 or whatever?

You could try @hughw he might have a copy buried somewhere. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Brass said:

Can anybody help me with a scan or a link to the IOR rule itself, IOR Mk3 or whatever?

I've got copies of III and IIIa, but they're on paper, not currently scanned.  I have never seen a scan of the whole rule (~80 pages) online.

If not urgent, I could drag one into the office and scan to PDF sometime this week. 

Failing that, there are some decent books available (eg, from Amazon).  Peter Johnson's "Yacht Rating" is a good place to start, covers the history of rating rules and has a pretty thorough chapter on the IOR.... including what worked and why it failed.  Used copies start at about $12 on Amazon...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Brass said:

Can anybody help me with a scan or a link to the IOR rule itself, IOR Mk3 or whatever?

Hi Brass, I've got a scanned copy of most of Mk III 1985 version, it's in 13 parts plus appendices (seem to be missing Part 1 for some reason but will see if I can find it).

PM me your email address and I can send through.

IOR Cover Page.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sledracr said:

To add: Bob Perry did a really good short-course overview of the IOR on his FB page a year or so back.  Complete with drawings.

I'll see if I can dig that out... or maybe @Somebody Else could come up with a link?

This article may be of interest-

http://rbsailing.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-end-of-ior.html

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Richard2249 said:

Hi Brass, I've got a scanned copy of most of Mk III 1985 version, it's in 13 parts plus appendices (seem to be missing Part 1 for some reason but will see if I can find it).

PM me your email address and I can send through.

Thanks PM coming.

14 hours ago, sledracr said:

I've got copies of III and IIIa, but they're on paper, not currently scanned.  I have never seen a scan of the whole rule (~80 pages) online.

If not urgent, I could drag one into the office and scan to PDF sometime this week. 

Failing that, there are some decent books available (eg, from Amazon).  Peter Johnson's "Yacht Rating" is a good place to start, covers the history of rating rules and has a pretty thorough chapter on the IOR.... including what worked and why it failed.  Used copies start at about $12 on Amazon...

Thanks.

See Richard's post above:  scan of Part 1 would be helpful.

PM also coming to you

Purpose of the request is that I'm compiling a glossary/data dictionary for a historical database of boats spanning IOR (and I suppose International Rule), IMS, IRC and ORCi and need to reconcile the definitions.  For example LOA may or may not include bowsprits and bumpkins and LWL does NOT mean Length at Water Line.

21 hours ago, mad said:

You could try @hughw he might have a copy buried somewhere. 

Thanks for the lead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob Perry posted an article a couple of years back that I think is a really good overview of the IOR system.  Posting here with his permission....

Time to sit up straight and spit your gum out. We are going to take a little peek at what made the IOR produce the shapes with which we have come to be quite familiar . Writing this article I was lucky to have the help of Yves-Marie Tanton and Alan Andrews. It helps to have smart friends.

Again, if you find this stuff fascinates you and you want to learn more, I'd suggest Peter Johnson's extremely well written book YACHT RATING, 170 years of speed, success and failure against competitors---and the clock.

If you struggled with my CCA article I suspect it will be hand to hand combat with my IOR article. It's a more complex rule. But at its heart it's quite simple, i.e. the fast elements divided by the slow elements, the bigger your slow elements the lower your rating. Look below at the formula for "R", i.e. rating. Very simple. On the face of it.

And puleeeze,,,do not call it the "IOR rule". IOR means International Offshore Rule. You don't need to add another :Rule" on the end.

I'll be peaking in all day, until the opera starts, so if you make it through the piece and have questions, let them fly.
Enjoy!

I’ve been looking forward to writing this. If your boat was designed between 1970 and 1985 your boat probably shows the effect of the International Offshore Rule. Even if your boat was never intended as a “race” boat the effects of the rule can probably be seen. What is current on the race course usually creeps into the mom and pop boats. Kind of like a rear deck spoiler on a Toyota. For this reason it might be of interest for you to understand how the IOR worked and why it produced the hull shapes and rigs we have come to recognize as IOR types. There are a lot of GOB’s that show IOR earmarks that come from this era and in almost all cases they make fine family cruising boats. Some of the more hard core IOR boats can be bought at a real bargain and they adapt well to cruising due to their well laid out and practical, if Spartan, out interiors. If your boat was designed by Gary Mull, Dick Carter, Alan Andrews, Ron Holland, Doug Peterson, Nelson/Marek, Brit Chance, German Frers and S&S to name only a few American designers that worked with the IOR then it’s safe to say it owes at least some of its shape to the IOR.

With the CCA producing some very rule specific designs in the US and the Royal Ocean Racing Club, and England’s RORC starting to produce its own version of rule loophole exploiting freaks the hand writing was on the wall. Both rules needed major revisions. At the same time international competition between offshore yachts was a problem because a CCA boat was not competitive racing under the RORC and vice versa. This was mainly due to the way each rule measured length and sail area. In the mid 60’s meetings were held to see if an international rule could be developed and used on both sides of the Atlantic. Olin Stephens was the chairman of the International Technical Committee and this committee was tasked with developing a rule that combined the CCA and the RORC rules. The result in 1969 was the IOR which basically used the RORC’s method of measuring the hull and the CCA’s measurement system for sail area. After some heavy opposition from CCA hold outs the IOR took off and was very quickly adopted by racing fleets in the US and Europe. Designer’s imaginations also took off as they looked for the loopholes in the new rule. The trick was to fool the rule into thinking the boat was slow by manipulating the measurement points while not sacrificing actual boat speed. That was the theory. There were some hurt feelings in the early going as owners of good CCA types like the Cal 40 realized they would no longer be competitive with an IOR rating.
This will be a demanding read but I’ll do my best so that we both can understand it.

The IOR on the surface looks far more complicated the old CCA rule. I was going to use the Mark III version from 1985 for this article. I have that version of the rule intact in the office. But the more I wrote using the 1985 formulas the more I was convinced that you, dear reader, would quickly be lost. I was getting lost. The IOR went through major changes during its lifetime and by 1985 in an effort to plug all the loopholes had become hopelessly complex. It is no accident that the IOR came along at a time when computers were first being used in design offices. Chuck Paine, while working for the Peace Corps at the University of Tehran wrote the version of the IOR program we used at Carter’s. “Hey Mohammed, check this out!”

The IOR started as a relatively simple rule taking the things that make a boat fast, i.e. Length and Sail Area and dividing them by the things that make the boat slow, i.e. displacement and Beam. So, like the CCA rule Length, Sail Area , Displacement and Beam are the primary elements to the rule. The bigger the slow numbers, Beam and Displacement for a given Length and Sail Area the lower the rating. It’s that simple. But rather than bury us in a world of abstruse formulas measuring in some cases minutia of design, with multiple correction factors I am going to take a bold step and write my own, ultra simplified version of the IOR. I will try to convey the intent of the rule.

It was how Length or L was determined that got complex and this is really the heart and soul of the IOR. To determine L the rule used two girth measurements in each end of the boat: Forward Girth Station FGS, Forward Inner Girth Section FIGS, Aft Girth Station AGS and Aft Inner Girth Station AIGS. The girths were functions of B, i.e. the FGS was located where the girth length was .5% of B and FIGS was located where the girth was the girth length was 75% B. The farther apart the girths in the ends were the fuller the ends of the boat appeared to the rule indicating a longer sailing length. Then in order to reduce L the distance LBG between the 2 forward girths and the 2 aft girths had to be minimized by moving the girths inward. Hull length beyond the girth stations did not enter into the rule. This is why you see some IOR boats with really long stern counters. Length aft of the AGS, Aft Girth Station, was not counted.

In the stern the distance between the girths , GSDA between AGS, Aft Girth Station and the AIGS Aft Inner Girth Station, needed to be compressed to make the rule think the boat was coming to an end quickly. If the two aft girth stations were spread apart the rule thought the boat was “longer” and L would be increased. This is why in an effort to minimize GSDA at the two aft girth stations you see so much distortion in the stern of IOR boats. The AIGS would be a girth through the skeg area forward of the rudder. A skeg was used of precise dimensions to increase the girth at this location. You can easily see the location of the AGS on most IOR boats. It’s almost always right at the rudder stock where the bustle is truncated to reduce the girth. Usually this girth is also at the outboard corner of the transom. One buttock at 15% of B was taken through each of the aft girth stations BHA and BHAI, to determine a buttock slope that would indicate the slope of the counter or run. The steeper the buttock slope the more was deducted from LBG. When all these elements are combined you get what in many cases is a distinct dimple at the aft girth stations. Even today it looks weird, un-natural and very “unfast”. This area was devilishly difficult for a designer to draw and control. There were none better at it than Yves –Marie Tanton. I learned to do it by watching Yves-Marie.

Bruce Farr and a handful of other designers from New Zealand designed light IOR boats with sterns too wide for the girth stations to fit within the rule’s parameters. But the penalty these boats took with their powerful, broad sterns was more than compensated for by the addition in sailing length and the increase in sailing righting moment. These boats were competitive upwind with their fractional rigs and they were much faster fast off the wind than the narrow sterned , heavy, older IOR types. The era of the ultra pinched stern would soon come to very welcomed end.

Rated Beam B was very important to the IOR because so many other measurements were functions of B. B was measured at the Beam Max station but at a point below the sheer by the amount BMAX divided by 6. This why you see so many old IOR boats with tumblehome. The apex of the tumblehome is right at the B location. Then the hull was tucked inwards to reduce the beam at the deck. For a few years this was thought to be the shape of speed. Doug Peterson changed that with his One Tonner GANBARE. He eliminated the tumblehome and just came up pretty straight from the B point to the deck. This allowed crew weight to be positioned further outboard for hiking. Tumblehome quickly disappeared from the IOR hull.

Displacement was measured by measuring depths of the hull at a forward depth station FDS and a Mid Depth Station MDS. The forward depth FD was measured forward at a point 10% of B off centerline. This lead to designers squaring off the fore foot producing flat bottoms forward. At the Mid Depth Station three depths were measured at various depths taken at functions of B. If you look at an IOR midsection you can see the shape very distinctly turning on those depth points. If you drew a shape that ignored the depth points you would have a heavier boat than the rule would give you credit for. The trick was to try to go from one point to the next. We called this “connect the dots” designing. Done right the boat would measure heavier than it actually was. While you wanted a boat that measured heavy you did not want a heavy boat. This is why so many IOR boats have absolutely flat bottoms. Once you hit that inboard depth point CMD the hull was flattened off. The shape was very interesting but I can’t say it was attractive. The shape only made sense in the context of the IOR. Using these depth measurements the IOR came up with a DSPL that was intended to represent the displacement of the boat.

There was always controversy about the way the IOR Center of Gravity Factor CGF. The boat was heeled at the dock and the data from inclining was used to determine a Righting Moment RM at one degree. This RM was put into a formula to determine your CGF. Up to a point a low RM allowed you to take the maximum CGF of .968. But you did not want to go below that point. The CGF was a direct multiplier of L so it was important to take the maximum allowance there. This made for initially tender boats. Designers often used internal ballast to raise the VCG and reduce initial stability. Doug Peterson actually had a pile of lead bolted to the deck of GANBARE to raise the VCG. The initial reason for the CGF was to access scantlings and handicap the boats that were lightly built with a lot of ballast. The rule wanted to promote strong boats and penalize flimsy boats. But it didn’t end up working that way. The boats were still relatively lightly built and the ballast just moved up to reduce the RM.

Draft DM was of course measured to the bottom of the keel and compared to a base draft DB calculated as .146 times L plus 2’. So for a boat with a 36’ L your DB would be 7.25’. If your actual draft exceeded this you would pay a punitive draft penalty. Early IOR boats almost always had DB for draft but as time went on taking the draft penalty became common. You could do a centerboard or a daggerboard. Bruce King did two very successful designs with twin, asymmetrical daggerboards and Bruce Farr did several successful single daggerboard boats. But centerboards and daggerboards qualified as “movable appendages” and were quite heavily penalized with a movable appendage factor MAF.

The drag of the propeller installation also figured into the rating as the Engine Propeller Factor EPF. It was advantageous to have you engine as far away from the midpoint as possible called the Engine Weight Distance EWD. We even saw IOR boats with engines in the bow, under V berths to maximize the EWD. You also benefitted from a heavy engine EW. Whether your prop was on a strut with an exposed shaft or you had a saildrive also entered into this part of the rule as did the type of prop, i.e. folding, feathering or fixed, the diameter of the prop and the depth of the prop. Most boats in order to get the maximum allowance of the EPF carried folding props as low as possible. At Carter’s office we buried hydraulic motors in the aft end of the keel and came out with a straight shaft to get the prop as low as possible and in the “shadow” of the keel’s disturbance.

There is little question, especially towards the end of the IOR that the hull measurements were complex. What started as a fairly simple rule became a monster. The rule was changed so often and so frequently to plug the loopholes that IOR boats were almost throwaways after one season of racing. This made for a very expensive sport if you wanted to stay competitive at the top level. It was not unheard of for a boat to be half way through construction only to find that the rule had been changed eliminating the advantages designed into the new boat.

The sail area portion of the IOR is quite simple if you ignore all the little “but ifs” . It was taken from the CCA rule and produced a Rated Sail Area Total RSAT. The dimensions of the rig now were the familiar I, J, E and P. Genoa overlap was LP. The IOR did establish a minimum mainsail area early on in order the keep the rigs fairly conventional. The IOR charged you for a minimal mainsail area whether you had it or not. Black bands were put on the mast and the boom to indicate the head, clew and tack positions. But in the early IOR days the designers almost always took the minimum mainsail area and went with large fore triangles and big overlapping genoas. In contrast to the CCA IOR genoas were usually had an LP around 150% of J. There was no sail area credit given if you went below 150% LP.

The tall skinny early IOR main, with severe batten length penalties that restricted roach, was often called a “ribbon main” and was not a very effective sail upwind or down. Rule limits on batten length and mainsail girths combined with sail cloth technology limitations produced a mainsail that was hard to shape to a wide variety of conditions. The answer to varying the power of the rig lay in a large inventory of headsails. The far simpler fractional rig trend, with smaller fore triangles and larger mainsails, started by the Kiwi designers combined with rule changes in mainsail measurement soon became the dominant geometry for the late IOR era boats and did away with huge headsail inventories.

If you want to see what happens if you take advantage of all the IOR sail area loop holes do some research on CACADE designed by Jerry Milgram. CASCADE was an extremely homely looking “ketch” with no fore triangle. CASCADE carried a wide variety of staysails and spinnakers off the tall mizzen. CASCADE had 800 sq. ft. of actual sail area but the rule rated it at 300 sq. ft. CASCADE was very effective on the race course until the rig loopholes were plugged. In CASACADE’s second season the rule dictated a minimum fore triangle area so you would pay for headsails even if you did not carry them. Does this sound familiar? Like the Luders designed STORM of the CCA days CASCADE had a big hull under what the rule saw as a small rig. But while CCA Storm was all headsails with no main IOR CASCADE was all main and mizzen with no headsails.

CASCADE was a solid punch in the nose to the IOR. The final blow to the IOR was most probably the Fastnet Race of 1979. In a fleet of 303 yachts 5 were lost and 19 were abandoned. 15 sailors lost their lives in this race. The finger of blame pointed at the IOR although none of the studies of the race were specific in their findings against the IOR. The general consensus, right or wrong, was that the IOR was producing boats that were not ocean worthy. This plus a series of high profile playing “scandals” where owners were found to be playing fast and loose with the measurement procedures finally did the IOR in. More boats were measured and rated under the IOR than to any other single rule.

The representative IOR boat from the middle of the IOR era was a strange boat compared the boats we see designed today. They were not bad boats but they did have some idiosyncrasies. The pinched ends and the fat middle made for a boat that was prone to rolling when sailed dead downwind in a breeze. Because the ends were pinched all the “meat” of the hull was right in the middle where the wave trough was at hull speed. This meant the boat had to roll significantly to start immersing enough midships volume to dampen the roll. The trick was for the helmsman to always try to keep the IOR boat under the spinnaker to reduce the chance of rounding up or even worse, rounding down, the death roll. Keep in mind it was the hull shape and the extra large fore triangle with tiny mainsail that both contributed to the IOR boat’s reputation off the wind. To counter this rolly characteristic and to gain some additional unmeasured sail area sail makers came up with the “blooper”. This was essentially a spinnaker flown without a pole and set to leeward of the real spinnaker behind the skinny ribbon main. The area of the blooper balanced, to some degree, the area of the spinnaker and helped keep the boat from rolling. They were photogenic too.

The CGF did not work out so well as the IOR boats transitioned from the racing scene to cruising life. Nobody wants a tippy boat and IOR boats were initially tippy. With their high VCG the IOR type also did not have great ultimate stability. But for the way most of us use our boats the IOR boats are fine stability wise. They are easy to heel but settle down around 25 degrees when on the wind. Most older IOR boats are quite fast upwind in light to moderate air and they can be beautifully balanced boats on the wind. Many IOR boats have been converted to successful blue water cruisers.

Congratulations if you made it this far. I hope the piece was easier to read than it was to write. Many thanks to designer Alan Andrews for his help with this piece.

 

R= L+RSA(CGF)(EPF) / B+DSPL

L= LBG +FOC+AOC

BD= .146(L)+ 2.00’

DSPL= L(B)(MDIA)(32)

IOR-2.jpg.ff709c136f893fbf1a23d8c9602998a4.jpg

IOR-1.jpg.3d301f258633676563173b727f8f4a4d.jpg

 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading that several times, it starts sinking in a little.  My boat is a beat up 1988 Dehler 34.  While no where near a race boat, the Dehler people didn't seem to make any effort to smooth out the weird hull flats from the full race DB1.  Thankfully, it seems to be designed in the "Kiwi" model with a fair run aft and a relatively wide stern that hopefully helps it from entering the death roll so soon.  I am old enough to have experienced that at the helm of a Tartan 41 on a race to Bermuda and I  was worn out after a couple of hours.  And Mr. Perry is correct, they do have a crap load of room down below!  Hopefully it will make a suitable cruising boat someday soon.

CIMG1751.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2020 at 12:58 PM, Richard2249 said:

Hi Brass, I've got a scanned copy of most of Mk III 1985 version, it's in 13 parts plus appendices (seem to be missing Part 1 for some reason but will see if I can find it).

PM me your email address and I can send through.

IOR Cover Page.jpg

Oh ya? Now, who's old as dirt! Me!

001.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2020 at 12:01 PM, zenmasterfred said:

Yes, we ended up 4th, one ill timed jibe at the finish line intimidated by my good friend Bill Buchan, he was on port and we were on starboard, my tactician called for a jibe and we gifted him a finish ahead of us.  Kicked us to 4th.  Hagar was great fun, finally had equipment to go head to head with the big boys, built by Bob Cadranell in Seattle was definitely a maxi 3/4 ton, we had to pull every trick out of the IOR measurement tool box to get her to rate.  Later became a Swiftsure short course rocket ship, first to finished that race a number of times and partied with all the wives of the long course sailors.  Did a lot miles with both Buchan brothers including a Soling Olympic campaign with Bill, won the worlds in 1975 but were one boat length off the pace on the first beat in 1976 which was impossible to overcome at the trials.

Our 3/4 ton Mull build

002_4.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sledracr said:

Bob Perry posted an article a couple of years back that I think is a really good overview of the IOR system.  Posting here with his permission....

Time to sit up straight and spit your gum out. We are going to take a little peek at what made the IOR produce the shapes with which we have come to be quite familiar . Writing this article I was lucky to have the help of Yves-Marie Tanton and Alan Andrews. It helps to have smart friends.

Again, if you find this stuff fascinates you and you want to learn more, I'd suggest Peter Johnson's extremely well written book YACHT RATING, 170 years of speed, success and failure against competitors---and the clock.

If you struggled with my CCA article I suspect it will be hand to hand combat with my IOR article. It's a more complex rule. But at its heart it's quite simple, i.e. the fast elements divided by the slow elements, the bigger your slow elements the lower your rating. Look below at the formula for "R", i.e. rating. Very simple. On the face of it.

And puleeeze,,,do not call it the "IOR rule". IOR means International Offshore Rule. You don't need to add another :Rule" on the end.

I'll be peaking in all day, until the opera starts, so if you make it through the piece and have questions, let them fly.
Enjoy!

I’ve been looking forward to writing this. If your boat was designed between 1970 and 1985 your boat probably shows the effect of the International Offshore Rule. Even if your boat was never intended as a “race” boat the effects of the rule can probably be seen. What is current on the race course usually creeps into the mom and pop boats. Kind of like a rear deck spoiler on a Toyota. For this reason it might be of interest for you to understand how the IOR worked and why it produced the hull shapes and rigs we have come to recognize as IOR types. There are a lot of GOB’s that show IOR earmarks that come from this era and in almost all cases they make fine family cruising boats. Some of the more hard core IOR boats can be bought at a real bargain a