i done did it
- Thread starter Editor
- Start date
solosailor
Super Anarchist
I'd bet good money Biden would smoke your ass on a bike.
DRP
New member
An interesting read would be the Ed's take on his modified H33 vs his two Flying Tigers.
Which is the faster boat boat at various wind angles/speeds, waves, etc.?
Numerous H33's have done the various Transpacs. Has the Flying Tiger (with appropriate modifications)?
How did he justify paying $70K vs about half for a premium example the FT?
Back in the 80's a H33 right out of the box from the factory did the Pac Cup.
Is the newer designed FT really that fragile?
9
Which is the faster boat boat at various wind angles/speeds, waves, etc.?
Numerous H33's have done the various Transpacs. Has the Flying Tiger (with appropriate modifications)?
How did he justify paying $70K vs about half for a premium example the FT?
Back in the 80's a H33 right out of the box from the factory did the Pac Cup.
Is the newer designed FT really that fragile?
9
Ex Machina
Super Anarchist
Chris in Santa Cruz CA
Super Anarchist
He bought a cool boat and paid what was needed. I am a sucker for optimized below waterline foils. Comparing that boat to a flying tiger is ridiculous. So what if a 1989 Porsche 944 turbo S can beat a 1959 Ferrari 250gt california spyder lwb around Laguna seca. Way more fun in the Ferrari.
Last edited:
silent bob
Super Anarchist
The original crew were known as The Black Widows.
DRP
New member
Well he did do pretty well both boat for boat and corrected against a Melges 32 and just about every other boat in the Newport to SD race (the FT was DNF). Hence my comment it would be an interesting read.
Based on his dismal performance at Yachting Cup.....I think not.
DA-WOODY
Super Anarchist
Eat'sa Pirate w uan buena a sotavento pierna
= can still Kick Ass w THAT Leg
posiblemente no hay orta pierna para parase
12 metre
Super Anarchist
Two issues I have with the mods are:
1) The rig. Going CF is good, but bumping the rig 4 feet likely incurred large penalties that will more than offset the speed advantages. May work in a Pac Cup or the likes, but that's about it. Turboing a rig can work on an under-canvassed design. A good example is a local Dash 34 that had a 2 foot rig bump from installing a Farr 30 rig with non-overlapping headsails. See photo below. Rates 66 compared to the 117 for the base Dash and sails to the 66 very well.
However the stock H33 has a SA/D of 27.25 which is greater than an O30, which is a good light air boat. So piling more SA onto an already powered up design isn't going to help as much as one might think.
2) The foils - mainly the keel. The rudder is fine - but since they went this far, I believe they should have looked at a better keel as well. Draft is only 5.5 feet with what looks like a standard IOR style trapezoidal keel with bulb. But the bulb is what I find disturbing. Granted, this was designed in the early days of bulb design - but it is way too short, squat, and full forward.
I would go with a shorter chord deeper fin or strut with modern bulb shape and bring the draft up to maybe 6.5-7 ft. This would increase RM to offset the increased HM from the 4 ft rig bump. I think I recently saw a Farr 30 keel for sale in the classifieds which weigh very similar to a H33 keel.
1) The rig. Going CF is good, but bumping the rig 4 feet likely incurred large penalties that will more than offset the speed advantages. May work in a Pac Cup or the likes, but that's about it. Turboing a rig can work on an under-canvassed design. A good example is a local Dash 34 that had a 2 foot rig bump from installing a Farr 30 rig with non-overlapping headsails. See photo below. Rates 66 compared to the 117 for the base Dash and sails to the 66 very well.
However the stock H33 has a SA/D of 27.25 which is greater than an O30, which is a good light air boat. So piling more SA onto an already powered up design isn't going to help as much as one might think.
2) The foils - mainly the keel. The rudder is fine - but since they went this far, I believe they should have looked at a better keel as well. Draft is only 5.5 feet with what looks like a standard IOR style trapezoidal keel with bulb. But the bulb is what I find disturbing. Granted, this was designed in the early days of bulb design - but it is way too short, squat, and full forward.
I would go with a shorter chord deeper fin or strut with modern bulb shape and bring the draft up to maybe 6.5-7 ft. This would increase RM to offset the increased HM from the 4 ft rig bump. I think I recently saw a Farr 30 keel for sale in the classifieds which weigh very similar to a H33 keel.
Somebody Else
a person of little consequence
Seriously, bite me on the "retro cool"!
Boats are either cool or not, regardless of age. What made Hobie 33s remotely interesting was the cost of entry, which is about as cheap as you can get. What you get for that is a boat which goes upwind on a par with a MacGregor 26. I'd rather get a smaller boat for the same money that performed worth a shit. Besides, you know, downwind in a blow...
12 metre
Super Anarchist
I think you're being a bit hard on the H33.
My only real recollection of them was when they had their Nationals at WIRW back in the late 80's or early 90's. Maybe 8-10 of them IIRC. They heeled a lot upwind, but seemed reasonably fast upwind. They had the first start and I don't recall any IOR 40s passing them on the first leg - which was fairly long back then.
Their typical US PHRF is around 96 - or about 6 sec faster than the O30 in both NorCal and SoCal.
Also I should mention that the H33 Por Favor finished 3rd in the inaugural R2AK behind a couple of Farriers - only 4 minutes out from the steak knives. That race was windy and lots of upwind work - Por Favor 3 up below in R2AK.
Having said all this, I would never consider a Hobie 33 - and that bulb is like nails on a blackboard to me. But give credit where it is due.
Last edited:
Somebody Else
a person of little consequence
OK, I guess
But I see
- non-stock rig
- cavitating keel
- rudder over half-way out of the water
00seven
James "Grumpy" Bond
It does look like they've got s bit on....
Meat Wad
Super Anarchist
I get that. This is why so many pay a premium for the old Santa Cruz balsa core models, you all know which boats I'm talking about. They up and down wind well. I'm not sure why he just does not get one that has bee tricked out. We got 2 Olson 30, an SC 27 and a Moore 24 just sitting in the CI Landing dry storage just begging for good owners. One of the Olson 30 has been listed here before.
That is the type of race the boat was modified for. it is really a one way boat or a very light air all around.
Chris in Santa Cruz CA
Super Anarchist
Very surprised the Moore is sitting there.
Irrational 14
Super Anarchist
In SoCal they actually do very well. NorCal too. Gift rating helps but they are just plain quick, especially in the light. Seen it over and over, FT's placing 1st-3rd, then the rest of the mixed fleet.
DRP
New member
Somebody Else is being very hard on the H33. Making one go upwind fast is a learning process. Year #1 sailing mine it would have been very easy to jump on the "they just don't go upwind well" bandwagon. I could never beat an O30, J29, Sov33, etc. to the windward mark. Year 2 after learning from some great sail makers it became so easy beating these other boats to the windward mark it almost became boring. Most H33 owners never learned how to sail their boats upwind which keep the PHRF rating (90, then lowered to 87) absurdly low. This was in the mid 80's in MDR when there were five times the number of boats out racing. Kids, wives, ex wives and the work time suck made sailing a luxury I had to suspend for a few decades. But, with retirement coming up and the last kid wrapping up college I'm considering reentry into the sailing scene. Do I get another H33 which I really enjoyed or try something newer like FT? Maybe something entirely different (I just don't want a slow boat).
