It finally hit me.
 

Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boat
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon

It finally hit me.
 

The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

Does this take into account adverse elements, such as wind and current or it
just for flat calm water? Seems to me that many boats are way underpowered
based on the above.

RB

It finally hit me.
 

Yes, many boats are underpowered. However, if the target speed is reduced to about 75% of
hull speed ( a ratio of 1.05 instead of 1.34) the HP required goes down to 1HP per 1000
pounds. This is why any sailboats are slower under power than under sail. (OK, there
are a few other factors ...)

A "True Motorsailer" will have more like 1 HP per 250 pounds - enough to keep the speed up
in adverse conditions. Two examples are the NorthEast 400 (100 HP for 22000 pounds) and
its big brother Bruckman 480 (140 HP for 42000 pounds)

-jeff

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

Does this take into account adverse elements, such as wind and current or it
just for flat calm water? Seems to me that many boats are way underpowered
based on the above.

RB

It finally hit me.
 

Yes, many boats are underpowered. However, if the target speed is reduced to
about 75% of
hull speed ( a ratio of 1.05 instead of 1.34) the HP required goes down to 1HP
per 1000

Interesting info, Jeff. Thanks.


RB

It finally hit me.
 

And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat".

Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which
boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since
ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass.

When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly
evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people
have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that
since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be
a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind.

Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous
levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued.

S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600 pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boat
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8 times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon

It finally hit me.
 

Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives
him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are
skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go.

-jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls!



"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat".

Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which
boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since
ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass.

When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly
evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people
have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that
since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be
a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind.

Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous
levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued.

S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a
remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The
Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600
pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa
t
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly
appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less
than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is
usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8
times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon

It finally hit me.
 

Nautical science? Where did that combination of words
come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant,
self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something
other than it is?

Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like
'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'.

But the bottom line is you once more failed to address
the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means
EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come
in a poor second. You also failed to understand that
EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the
ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not
to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise
you're no sailor.

In your particular case you have two diesels in a
boat which can in no way be considered an honest
sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails.


S.Simon




"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really drives
him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are
skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go.

-jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls!



"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat".

Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which
boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since
ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass.

When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly
evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people
have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that
since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be
a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind.

Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous
levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued.

S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a
remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The
Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each 500-600
pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a boa
t
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42 displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly
appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably less
than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function. The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is
usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace 8
times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon

It finally hit me.
 

Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of
saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering a
sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other
boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting the
stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out of
the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a trail of
fuel wherever you go.

And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered there,
you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there!

But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP outboards
but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in the
first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really overkill.

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Nautical science? Where did that combination of words
come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant,
self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something
other than it is?

Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like
'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'.

But the bottom line is you once more failed to address
the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means
EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come
in a poor second. You also failed to understand that
EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the
ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not
to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise
you're no sailor.

In your particular case you have two diesels in a
boat which can in no way be considered an honest
sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails.


S.Simon




"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really
drives
him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are
skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go.

-jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls!



"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat".

Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which
boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since
ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass.

When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly
evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people
have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that
since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be
a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind.

Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous
levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued.

S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a
remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The
Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of
water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each
500-600
pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a
boa
t
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42
displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly
appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably
less
than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function.
The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is
usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace
8
times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with
his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon

It finally hit me.
 

So you finally grew large enough gonads to admit the truth.

You value your motors above your sails. Your main concern
when buying a so-called sailboat was what engine(s) to fit. That
strikes me as pathetic. It proves my contention that you are just
another motor boater pretending to be a sailor - or, to be a little
more kind, an old sailor who's gotten too lazy to sail much any
more.

To correct a couple of your misconceptions, my little outboard
is a 2001, 9.9 HP, Honda 4-stroke which meets 2006 emission
standards. It is a far cleaner and environmentally friendly than your
twin diesel pollution machines. It burns less than two quarts per hour
at five knots and does not use pre-mix so it doesn't put oil into the
water and air like 2-stroke outboard engines. It has a 12 amp
alternator (optional charging coil). It cost me only $1800. It weighs
in at 100 pounds.

As an option your environmentally unfriendly diesels probably cost
you well over ten grand for the pair. They weigh at least five to seven
times more than my 100 pound motor/transmission/prop combination.
They harm the performance of your boat more than you'll ever know
until you toss the lot overboard and do some pure sailing sometime
again instead of allowing your being ever so out of shape and obese
to force you into motoring the majority of the time.

S.Simon


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of
saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering a
sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other
boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting the
stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out of
the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a trail of
fuel wherever you go.

And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered there,
you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there!

But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP outboards
but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in the
first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really overkill.

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Nautical science? Where did that combination of words
come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant,
self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something
other than it is?

Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like
'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'.

But the bottom line is you once more failed to address
the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means
EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come
in a poor second. You also failed to understand that
EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the
ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not
to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise
you're no sailor.

In your particular case you have two diesels in a
boat which can in no way be considered an honest
sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails.


S.Simon




"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really
drives
him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and are
skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go.

-jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls!



"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat".

Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which
boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since
ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass.

When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly
evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people
have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that
since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be
a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind.

Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous
levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued.

S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a
remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement. The
Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume of
water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each
500-600
pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda 40, a
boa
t
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42
displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly
appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is considerably
less
than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic" function.
The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and is
usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will displace
8
times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent with
his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon

It finally hit me.
 

I've always admitted to the boat I have and why I decided on it. I'll even admit that
I've had second thoughts - then I've heard horror stories of the outboards going belly up
without any spare parts in the hemisphere.

But the bottom line is that I've already done a lot more sailing than you, so I don't mind
admitting that now that I'm older and have family responsibilities, I enjoy getting to a
beautiful destination, and don't mind using the engine to get there.

Tell you what Neal: why don't you throw away your engine, your GPS, and your VHF and
cruise the Maine coast for a season. Then we'll let you join the club of real sailors!






"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
So you finally grew large enough gonads to admit the truth.

You value your motors above your sails. Your main concern
when buying a so-called sailboat was what engine(s) to fit. That
strikes me as pathetic. It proves my contention that you are just
another motor boater pretending to be a sailor - or, to be a little
more kind, an old sailor who's gotten too lazy to sail much any
more.

To correct a couple of your misconceptions, my little outboard
is a 2001, 9.9 HP, Honda 4-stroke which meets 2006 emission
standards. It is a far cleaner and environmentally friendly than your
twin diesel pollution machines. It burns less than two quarts per hour
at five knots and does not use pre-mix so it doesn't put oil into the
water and air like 2-stroke outboard engines. It has a 12 amp
alternator (optional charging coil). It cost me only $1800. It weighs
in at 100 pounds.

As an option your environmentally unfriendly diesels probably cost
you well over ten grand for the pair. They weigh at least five to seven
times more than my 100 pound motor/transmission/prop combination.
They harm the performance of your boat more than you'll ever know
until you toss the lot overboard and do some pure sailing sometime
again instead of allowing your being ever so out of shape and obese
to force you into motoring the majority of the time.

S.Simon


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Address the issue? Your ramblings about "First she's a sailboat" is just your way of
saying you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to powering
a
sailboat. The truth is, you have just as much power, proportionately, as most other
boats. However, you have it hanging off the stern so it causes more drag by squatting
the
stern than my folding props do. Its useless in a surf because the prop will come out
of
the water. It has a 6 Amp alternator. Yours is probably a 2-stroke that spews a
trail of
fuel wherever you go.

And to top it off, your log shows that on your last trip to the Bahamas you powered
there,
you powered back, and you powered much of the time you were there!

But you're right about one thing - I had the option of powering with twin 10HP
outboards
but chose the small diesels because I knew I would be powering at least 3000 miles in
the
first 2 years I owned the boat. But still, 36HP for a 36 foot boat isn't really
overkill.

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Nautical science? Where did that combination of words
come from I wonder. Maybe from a group of ignorant,
self-centered folks who wish to make of sailing something
other than it is?

Next thing you'll be claiming is some nonsense like
'multi-hull science' or 'the science of nose picking'.

But the bottom line is you once more failed to address
the issue which is 'first she's a sailboat' which means
EVERYTHING - even your precious motors come
in a poor second. You also failed to understand that
EVERYTHING that in any way compromises the
ability of a sailboat so sail up to her potential is not
to be valued above pure sailing. If you think otherwise
you're no sailor.

In your particular case you have two diesels in a
boat which can in no way be considered an honest
sailboat. Your catamaran is a motorboat with sails.


S.Simon




"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Typical Neal gibberish to hide is total ignorance of nautical science. It really
drives
him crazy that there are people who understand naval architecture as a science and
are
skeptical of crackpots who make it up as they go.

-jeff - Two Motors for Two Hulls!



"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
And you, Jeff, like the majority of pretend sailors here, consistently
fail to remember Rule 1 which states "First she's a sailboat".

Any and all discussion of volume and or displacement of water which
boils down to mass can be more simply stated using LOA since
ballasted monohull sailboats all fall within a predictable range of mass.

When one keeps Rule 1 in mind at all times it becomes increasingly
evident that everything - yes, even motors (some absurd people
have TWO of them) come second, third, fourth etc. It follows that
since 'first she's a sailboat' that any and all motors are intended to be
a supplement and only needed for flat water when there is no wind.

Any and all other reasons to use your motor(s) that require such ridiculous
levels of HP and weight violate Rule 1. This cannot be argued.

S.Simon - keeps his priorities straight.


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
Sorry about the late reply - I'm just catching up ...

Your claim of "one horsepower for every foot of length" is absurd and shows a
remarkable
lack of understanding of nautical science.

Required HP is not a function of length, it is a function of displacement.
The
Simplistic
way to remember this is that moving the boat requires pushing aside a volume
of
water
equal to the displacement. The rough rule of thumb is that one HP for each
500-600
pounds
of displacement is required to push a boat to hull speed.

For a Coronado 27, this works out to about 10-12 HP. For a Hinckley Bermuda
40, a
boa
t
Bill Tripp would prefer to be remembered for, this is 40 HP. The newer H42
displaces
23,500 and has 50 HP; the 51 displaces 40,000 and has 88 HP. All perfectly
appropriate.
Remember that diesel should be run at 80% rpm, where the output is
considerably
less
than
the rated power.

So how does displacement vary with length? This is roughly a "cubic"
function.
The
"Displacement/Length" ratio is roughly constant for a given design style, and
is
usually
computed as "Tons / ( (WL ft/100) **3). Thus, a boat twice as long will
displace
8
times
as much, and require 8 times the HP. This fits in with the boats listed.

Once again, Neal has displayed mathematical and scientific skills consistent
with
his
education as an English major.

-jeff
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Dear Ms. Carroll

You're beginning to catch on, Mam! Of course, any boat
that has more than one horsepower for every foot of length
in NOT a sailboat. It is simply a motor boat with spars.
The very best it can be called is a "motor sailer."

Think of how absurd the very idea of 50 horsepower in any
42-foot motor boat with masts really is? It only takes 20 horses
to drive that particular Hinckley to hull speed. So, why all the
extra power and weight? The answer is simple. It's because
the boat is designed to motor and charge huge battery banks
to run all manner of unnecessary crud that really has no business
aboard a sailboat. Nobody but rich, ignorant snobs own Hinckley's
anyway. Hinckleys are an example of a boat that is way way way
overpriced for what you get. Only rich ignorant snobs spend
so much money on a name. These same people wear Rolex
Oysters not because they keep any better time than a cheap
Timex but because they think it gives them status.

Well, the bottom line is their boat and wrist watch are only owned
so they can feel good about themselves. For the most part these
people are no different than Bobsprit except they have money to
burn. They think brand names mean everything and since they can
buy pretty much whatever they want they buy things they think
will make people the most envious. Little do they realize real
sailors laugh at them and their ignorance. Real sailors know what
these pathetic individuals are all about. We laugh when we see
them motoring their so-called sailboats around expecting folks
to ooh and aah!

Would that they were more honest and just bought a motor boat
in the first place.

S.Simon - has more common sense than most people


"The Carrolls" wrote in message
.. .
So a Hinkley Sou'wester is not a sailboat? 50 hp at 42 feet.
"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

"Kelton Joyner" wrote in message
...
So, a 38' Cabo Rico is not a sailboat? BS.


A Cabo Rico 38' is, indeed, a motor boat with sails unless someone
had one commissioned without motor. Any sailboat that has a built in
motor with more than one horsepower for each meter of length is a
motorsailer at best.

What's a Cabo Rico 38 have? About 40-50 horsepower? To be
a sailboat it would have to have no more than 12 horsepower.

S.Simon