Getting the bobstay lower is better...but you will need some help with boat building
Flying Tiger
- Thread starter Jerryd
- Start date
RumTumTigga
New member
We got a code zero for our FT10 in NZ 3 seasons ago. We installed a Bobstay so that the luff of the zero could be kept tight and the roller fuller would work. We have not had any problems with this set up. Here are a few shots to show you what we did.
1) This shot is of the prod extended and the bobstay set up. Gives you an overall view of our set up.
2) The second shot is the detail of how we fastened the bobstay on the bow.Just above the waterline and approx 2inches in from the bow we drilled a 10mm diameter hole through. Into this we inserted a piece of thick walled 10mm OD carbon tube. Them spliced the spectra loop through this.
This set up has been working well for 3 seasons now.
RTT
1) This shot is of the prod extended and the bobstay set up. Gives you an overall view of our set up.
2) The second shot is the detail of how we fastened the bobstay on the bow.Just above the waterline and approx 2inches in from the bow we drilled a 10mm diameter hole through. Into this we inserted a piece of thick walled 10mm OD carbon tube. Them spliced the spectra loop through this.
This set up has been working well for 3 seasons now.
RTT
Last edited by a moderator:
Ricky Bobby06870
New member
- 3
- 0
Awesome! Thanks.
If you try to attach a strop to the trailer/bow eye you deserve what you get - that's a stupid idea.
Put a proper strop on down near the waterline as illustrated above. All the research I did for #71 said that the strop wasn't critical, but to improve luff tension and overall sail shape the strop is a huge winner - for a very cheap investment.
The other part is that with a strop and higher luff tensions you'll have higher loads on your tack line. We moved our pole-out line to a 3:1 to handle the higher loads and keep a stock setup.
Put a proper strop on down near the waterline as illustrated above. All the research I did for #71 said that the strop wasn't critical, but to improve luff tension and overall sail shape the strop is a huge winner - for a very cheap investment.
The other part is that with a strop and higher luff tensions you'll have higher loads on your tack line. We moved our pole-out line to a 3:1 to handle the higher loads and keep a stock setup.
I'm curious... given how tender the Tiger can be and how powerful a zero is, what wind range would you use it in?
RumTumTigga
New member
on the wind up to 5 - 7 Kts true wind speed. With sheets just cracked up to about 12Kts TWS.
The onboard discussion often goes like this......"What does it look like at the next mark?" "Eased sheets, might be a bit tight for the Gennaker tho" "Should we stay with the J2 then or peel to the Fractional Zero?" "Wind is light enough, lets go to the Zero, there is enough space in the course to lay off a bit if we need to."
So i guess the more complete answer is there is no hard and fast rule it is a judgement call when we are out there.The Fr0 has been a race winner for us in some situations.
Also when we were thinking about a zero we discussed in detail between ourselves and our local Norths guru whether we should go to a masthead zero or a Fractional zero. Taking into account that the Tiger is fairly tender and easily driven we decided on a Fractional Zero. This also meant we had the masthead halyard available for a peel to the MH Gennaker if the wind angle changed.
RTT
Last edited by a moderator:
redboat
Super Anarchist
I'm certain this has been previously discussed but..............
Has an FT10 ever done the Transpac? Singlehanded, Doublehanded or fully crewed?
Downwind flyer and success in coastal races but do structural or design limitations make it unwise to consider the boat for the event?
In addition to emergency rudder, solar panels and electrical system redo, what rig or structural modifications would be prudent?
.....or just buy a tried and true Olson 30 and work with that?
Has an FT10 ever done the Transpac? Singlehanded, Doublehanded or fully crewed?
Downwind flyer and success in coastal races but do structural or design limitations make it unwise to consider the boat for the event?
In addition to emergency rudder, solar panels and electrical system redo, what rig or structural modifications would be prudent?
.....or just buy a tried and true Olson 30 and work with that?
tweaker
Member
I always thought the FT 10 would be a great boat for the T pac . Carefully prepped. I did it on a Col 32 and did many costal runs(SF to SB) on a Hendo 30 . Flexible solar panels, lithium batteries, Maybe a 2.0 -4.0 Torqeedo and 2kw Honda for continuous running, and spare rudders. 4 crew max.Not sure where they might need to be reinforced.
solosailor
Super Anarchist
.... and in '18 with a class win.
Bulga Naba
Member
As a just recently former Owner who has thrashed offshore many times with our MHK, I would not hesitate on a "structural basis" (unless you consider my advancing age part of the structure) , given final satisfaction with the Betts V4 rudder, and a custom spare rudder/cassette for serious offshore work. Beyond what owners will naturally do - new bolts and reinforcement at stern for rudder attachment, stronger stanchions, secure keel and fill keel/hull gap, better gasket at the sprit, maybe remove the kelp cutter to solve one potential fire hose effect. Check spreader saddles. (caveat - more work required on maybe the first 20 hulls that were still working out some kinks) Crew of 4 would do nicely, but double handed PacCup could work too. Only concern would be weighing her down with all the required equipment and H20 could adversely affect performance; but others have solved that a la the Melges and Columbia 32s. Not saying I would be up for it (Maybe Cabo would be my personal limit on a Tiger) but a group of young chargers could make it work and have a ball doing it. (Note: Years back a Tiger Owner in Portland area was giving it serious thought for a while, but then backed off)
solosailor
Super Anarchist
You'll never find out now as the minimum length has been upped to 38ft.
jackolantern
Super Anarchist
- 1,821
- 641
Wait, for what?
solosailor
Super Anarchist
Cabo.
Has anyone modified the exit sheave boxes in the mast to allow for additional halyards? I have sent emails to CST composites to see if they would give any insight but have yet to get any response. I would like to avoid using exterior halyards with a modified mast head carrier if possible. I really would like to have a spare jib and spin halyard. Have any of you done this modification?
I don't think there is a good way to put a second sheave (2 side by side) in the mast head without doing major modifications to the masthead. There's not much room in the carbon fiber either. You could put one below the existing, but it wouldn't be as strong as the original as you wouldn't be able to tie in to the masthead structure. You also lose a few inches of height. The masthead carrier is way simpler. A second jib halyard would be nice. It would be nice for sail changes. Again though, it seems a side by side sheave would need a significant hole cutout in the mast and would really weaken it.
The harken 51mm 310 are the sheaves currently used https://www.harken.com/productdetail.aspx?sku=310
The harken 51mm 310 are the sheaves currently used https://www.harken.com/productdetail.aspx?sku=310
Last edited by a moderator:
