Lloyd Sumpter wrote:


1. lose the $10K kevlar racing sails and put on dacron cruising sails

Why? If you've already got them, why not use them?


1. If you're buying new, you'd have to buy them, adding $10K to the
purchase price. Something cruisers don't do.

If you're going cruise, or race non-seriously, you can get 'normal' Dacron sails for
a Merit 25. The increased longevity of high tech sails usually makes them worth
having for somebody that sails a lot, though.... even cruising.....


2. If they're used, the RACING concept would be to replace after a year to
two - again an expense most cruisers aren't will to accept.

That doesn't make the Merit a slower boat than the Catalina 250... just that a Merit
with old sails is slower than a Merit 25 with new ones.



4. Add 6 mos accumulation of marine growth on the hull

Again, why? That's just plain neglectful and stupid. Especially on a small
boat that can be scrubbed with no great effort or time sunk.

How many times do you haul the boat?? If it's a racing boat, it often gets
hauled after every race, or at least many times in one year. Cruising
boats typically get hauled once a year. This is my point of "racing" vs
"cruising" mentality.

My point is that both are small boats. You can swim around them and scrub the bottom
two or three times a year and don't worry about hauling. Besides, if you're talking
about trailerables, then 'hauling' is a stupid thing to worry about.


And you'll find these pocket rocketships don't go so fast. In fact, the
C25 may even beat it.

If the C25 was sailed under the same circumstances, not at all likely.


Hasn't been my experience. Many Martin 242's have been "converted" to
cruising boats, and they're not noticably faster than comparably-equipped
C25, C&C, US25, etc.

In that case, I'd suspect that the boat has been more than just 'loaded to cruising
trim' and I'd also suspect that the skipper wasn't up to sailing fast anyway.




Why? The racers are designed to sail LIGHT and with
a lot of drive. For instance, they're not designed to sail downwind with a
genny. Many have very fine entries which work great when racing, but screw
up when there's 100lb of anchor gear in the bow.

Actually, the finer bow is likely to be slowed down less by weight forward.

I was referring to weight distribution. A lighter boat will suffer more
from "incorrect" weight placement than a heavier boat. Also, lack of
bouyance fwd WILL be more affected by weight fwd.

No it won't. The shape will still go through the water faster.

Basically, what you're trying to say is "This boat will beat that one under X
circumstances, so therefore the other boat will be faster under Y circumstances." As
though life were fair. It isn't. Just because Wayme Gretsky can beat you at hockey
doesn't mean you can automatically beat him at basketball.



.... My logic is more like "MJ can jump higher than an NFL lineman
because the lineman's way heavier. Make MJ the same weight as the lineman,
and I'll bet he couldn't jump as high as the lineman."

And you could still be wrong.



If a Catalina 25 is trialed against a Merit 25, with both of them light or
both of them loaded, the Merit is going to prove faster.


Totally "like for like"? Maybe. But noticably? In a race, 1/4 knot is VERY
significant, but cruising, 1/2 knot is nothing.

That depends on how far you're going. Each 1/2 knot is 4 miles further for every 8
hours sailing; which could mean getting to the same anchorage earlier or it could
mean getting to the next further anchorage. Besides, a boat with a more efficient
sail plan & underwater foils, such as the Merit or the Martin, is going to get to
windward at an increased margin over a 'cruising' boat.

Bottom line is, the Cat250 is roomier, but that doesn't automatically make it a
'better cruising' boat. And it darn sure doesn't make it faster with a load.


Tell me, is your boat's stability increased by filling a fuel tank down low in
the hull? Fuel is definitely lighter than water. How about a big cooler full
of ice & beer?


Compared to AIR, yes. Compared to lead, no. I'd show you the mathematics
if you feed me beer.

Math, huh? Do you do numbers any better than you do logic?

So... because lead ballast is better, as ballast, does that mean water cannot
function AT ALL as ballast?

No. Of course not.

So.... for a trailerable boat, where the weight of the ballast is a disadvantage at
specific and significant times, water is a pretty good choice for ballast.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King