Jeff Morris wrote:

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...

I didn't like the swing keel and open keel chamber in the bottom of the
hull. - On the 26M, it has been replaced by a more narrow, dagger
board, providing better upwind performance (from everyone I have talked
with who has sailed the boat), and it be raised or lowered incrementally
to more closely match the current conditions. (The swing keel, if not
kept in the fully down position, would alter the center of resistance.)


Although I generally prefer the daggerboard, the ability to shift the CLF
(Center of Lateral Resistance) aft is very handy.

I understand that there are tradeoffs, and that moving the CLF might be
useful in some circumstances. From everyone I have spoken with who has
sailed her, that the dagger board permits the boat to do better upwind.
It also permits removing the cavity in which the swing keel nested,
reducing drag. And it can be extended partially or fully, as desired for
the particular point of sail.


I also didn't like the idea of relying totally on the water ballast. -
The 26M includes both water and permanent ballast, and provides more
versatility for motoring without the water ballast.


The permanent ballast was required because the V hull raised the Center of
Gravity too much.

I think that some permanent ballast is a safety factor in any such boat.

I also had problems with the hull shape, which was relatively flat
throughout the length of the boat for enhanced planing ability.


Meaning the new hull will not plane as easily.

Agreed. Despite what others have said, it's still primarily a sailboat,
not a power boat, though the new hull permits the boat to cut through
chop more smoothly. Again, there are tradeoffs in any design.


Jim