I think the original figure is with an empty boat that floats
much higher up in the water. Even then I think the LWL
would be greater than 22 feet, though. Another thing is
the shoal keel is about five hundred pounds heaver
than the stantard keel so mine, which is a shoal keel,
floats deeper in the water to begin with even when not
loaded for cruising and living aboard.


"Wally" wrote in message ...
"Simple Simon" wrote in message

Finally, a voice of reason. Thank you Wally.

Can't argue with the numbers. If the 22' is an original Coronado spec, I can
only assume that it was a typo or a misreading of a handwritten note. What
amazes me is that nobody thought to question it until now. You must have had
one of those "wait a minute, that's not right..." moments.


--
Wally
I demand rigidly-defined areas of uncertainty!
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk

"Simple Simon" wrote in message

I think the original figure is with an empty boat that floats
much higher up in the water. Even then I think the LWL
would be greater than 22 feet, though.

I would agree with that - 3 feet is a lot to lose. Looking at the port-side
view on...

http://captneal.homestead.com/haulout.html

....I estimate 22 feet from the stern to end somewhere between the stand
under the bow and the dark object in the background just to its left.


Another thing is
the shoal keel is about five hundred pounds heaver
than the stantard keel so mine, which is a shoal keel,
floats deeper in the water to begin with even when not
loaded for cruising and living aboard.

Does the line of your blue antifoul leave the same nominal freeboard as
Coronado 27s with the standard keel?


--
Wally
I demand rigidly-defined areas of uncertainty!
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk

I've raised the boot stripe about 8 inches over the years.


"Wally" wrote in message ...
"Simple Simon" wrote in message

I think the original figure is with an empty boat that floats
much higher up in the water. Even then I think the LWL
would be greater than 22 feet, though.

I would agree with that - 3 feet is a lot to lose. Looking at the port-side
view on...

http://captneal.homestead.com/haulout.html

...I estimate 22 feet from the stern to end somewhere between the stand
under the bow and the dark object in the background just to its left.


Another thing is
the shoal keel is about five hundred pounds heaver
than the stantard keel so mine, which is a shoal keel,
floats deeper in the water to begin with even when not
loaded for cruising and living aboard.

Does the line of your blue antifoul leave the same nominal freeboard as
Coronado 27s with the standard keel?


--
Wally
I demand rigidly-defined areas of uncertainty!
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk

You're right - you lost considerable freeeboard aft. Is your transom supposed to be
underwater?

Before you start "spending" your extra speed, remember that Waterline does not
automatically produce speed. If your LWL was increased by adding 2000 pounds
displacement (that only lowers you 3 inches) then your displacement went from 6200 to
8200, which drops your SA/disp down to a dismal 10.7! While your ultimate speed may be
faster, your medium air performance is now pathetic.


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
I think the original figure is with an empty boat that floats
much higher up in the water. Even then I think the LWL
would be greater than 22 feet, though. Another thing is
the shoal keel is about five hundred pounds heaver
than the stantard keel so mine, which is a shoal keel,
floats deeper in the water to begin with even when not
loaded for cruising and living aboard.


"Wally" wrote in message
...
"Simple Simon" wrote in message

Finally, a voice of reason. Thank you Wally.

Can't argue with the numbers. If the 22' is an original Coronado spec, I can
only assume that it was a typo or a misreading of a handwritten note. What
amazes me is that nobody thought to question it until now. You must have had
one of those "wait a minute, that's not right..." moments.


--
Wally
I demand rigidly-defined areas of uncertainty!
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk