Bobsprit wrote:

Incidentally, are you also an astronomy expert? That happens to be one
of my intersts, and I plan on being at the TSP again this year.


Not an "expert" but I've been an avid amatuer for 20 years. I currently use a
Celestron 9.25. I do most of my observing in PA where darker skies still
prevail. I used to use a Dynascope RV6, Celestron 8 and Questar Duplex. I've
used a lot of scopes and do consider myself an armchair expert when it comes to
scope buying.

RB

I have a 16-inch newt mounted in a truss-tube Dob assembly. I'm a
member of the NASA -JSC astronomy club and have been attending the Texas
Star Party for several years, held annually in the spring in west Texas.
I also have one the new Meade autoguided systems. I'm hoping to
finish the Messier list this year. - Don't think this would work on a
boat, but binocular observing should be good off shore.

Jim

No he is not.
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
Bob is an expert at everything.

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...


Bobsprit wrote:

The Cal is the better boat all around. Since you didn't even look at
the
SA/D
ratios of the rigs, I'd have to say you have quite a bit more to
learn.
Do some more reading. Looking at waterline is like a 1st time
telescope
buyer
asking "how far a scope can see."

RB

How do you compute sail area for this ratio, since the area would vary
significantly depending on what sails were set?

Incidentally, are you also an astronomy expert? That happens to be one
of my intersts, and I plan on being at the TSP again this year.
Jim

If you can or can't prove it, then he will claim he is.

"The Carrolls" wrote in message
...
No he is not.
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
Bob is an expert at everything.

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...


Bobsprit wrote:

The Cal is the better boat all around. Since you didn't even look at
the
SA/D
ratios of the rigs, I'd have to say you have quite a bit more to
learn.
Do some more reading. Looking at waterline is like a 1st time
telescope
buyer
asking "how far a scope can see."

RB

How do you compute sail area for this ratio, since the area would vary
significantly depending on what sails were set?

Incidentally, are you also an astronomy expert? That happens to be one
of my intersts, and I plan on being at the TSP again this year.
Jim

Except routers.

In article , Jonathan Ganz
wrote:

Bob is an expert at everything.

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...


Bobsprit wrote:

The Cal is the better boat all around. Since you didn't even look at the
SA/D
ratios of the rigs, I'd have to say you have quite a bit more to learn.
Do some more reading. Looking at waterline is like a 1st time telescope
buyer
asking "how far a scope can see."

RB

How do you compute sail area for this ratio, since the area would vary
significantly depending on what sails were set?

Incidentally, are you also an astronomy expert? That happens to be one
of my intersts, and I plan on being at the TSP again this year.
Jim

SA/D is generally based on a 100% jib, unless otherwise indicated. It's just
one additional piece of the puzzle when roughly predicting how a given design
will perform.

http://www.sailingusa.info/cal__sad_ratio.htm

RB

If you know how to interpret the #'s, try this instead, they do most of the
calculations for you.
http://www.phrf-nb.org/year2002/ratings/PHRFratings.htm
John Cairns
"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...

After all the interesting, thoughtful, considerate, helpful, balanced,
discussions regarding the Mac26M, I'm still looking at different
options. There seem to be some great buys on larger boats in our area,
and in the same price range as the Mac 26 or lower, there are some nice
boats in the 32 to 34 foot range. I prefer a responsive, relatively
fast coastal cruiser rather than a heavy, ocean passage blue water boat,
and the Cal 34's and O'Day 34's seem to meet those requisites. There are
also some C&C's, Catalinas, Columbias, Hunters, etc., in the same
general price range, and others, such as the Sabres, Newports, Benetau,
Cheoy Lee, etc, that seem to be more expensive.

As far as cruising speed in typical ( e.g., 15 - 20 knot) winds, under
full normal jib and main, average load, and equally experienced
captains, etc., would there be a significant difference in speed or
handling between the Cal and O'Day, both being in good condition and
similarly equipped? The (1978) Cal 34-III has a waterline of 26 ft, and
the (1983) O'Day has a 28'9" waterline, according to the spec sheets.
Plugging this into the formula (square root of wl times 1.34), I get a
predicted hull speed for the O'Day of around 7.185 knots, and 6.833
knots for the Cal. In actual practice, would this be close to what I
would see under most cruising conditions? The O'Day, at 11,500 lb., is
slightly heavier than the Cal and has a draft of 5'7", LOA 34, beam
11'3", compared with 10,200 lb., draft 4'9", LOA 33'6", and beam 9'3"
for the Cal.

Can anyone provide some comments on or comparisons of the sailing
characteristics of these two boats? It's my understanding that the Cal
may be somewhat more of a racing boat, responsive but a bit more tender,
and the O'Day may be a little stiffer but steady under heavy winds. For
example, I recall seeing over 9 knots on a 40-ft Valiant we sailed in
the Gulf under 15-20 knot winds, which I think was more than its
predicted hull speed.

Comments, suggestions, or recommendations regarding these or other
similar boats will be appreciated.

Jim

Jim,

The Cal will do a horizon job on the O'Day. That doesn't mean the O'Day
is a Slug. The Cal is a pretty fast boat. I've sail in a fleet with a
Cal 34 sail by a club member. He put new sails on her and won the
"TransPac" overall on handicap. It is also a better built vessel and
cruises well.

So does the O'Day ( Cruise Well) but in my mind, the Cal is a better
boat. As you say, the O'day is roomier and it certainly not a badly
built vessel. It may be the but for you. They don't have to apologise
for quality or sailing ability but isn't in the same class with the Cal
34.

Ole Thom
P/S got your post about "The Institute" I'm afraid I am quite a bit
before your time. My biggest memory is the Library there and the
thickness of those wall at the Gun port/windows.

Ole Thom

I wouldn't argue with your claim that the Cal is better built than the O'Day,
which I've always considered a notch or two below Pearsons, etc. in quality.
But I'm not sure the Cal is faster in general conditions. In fact, its PHRF is
about 20 to 25 point higher. I think the O'Day would hold its own very nicely,
while giving a more comfortable ride.



"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Jim,

The Cal will do a horizon job on the O'Day. That doesn't mean the O'Day
is a Slug. The Cal is a pretty fast boat. I've sail in a fleet with a
Cal 34 sail by a club member. He put new sails on her and won the
"TransPac" overall on handicap. It is also a better built vessel and
cruises well.

So does the O'Day ( Cruise Well) but in my mind, the Cal is a better
boat. As you say, the O'day is roomier and it certainly not a badly
built vessel. It may be the but for you. They don't have to apologise
for quality or sailing ability but isn't in the same class with the Cal
34.

Ole Thom
P/S got your post about "The Institute" I'm afraid I am quite a bit
before your time. My biggest memory is the Library there and the
thickness of those wall at the Gun port/windows.

Ole Thom

Jeff Morris wrote:
I wouldn't argue with your claim that the Cal is better built than the O'Day,
which I've always considered a notch or two below Pearsons, etc. in quality.

O'Day build quality varied a lot over the years. Actually so did
Pearson, they were each owned by several different companies over time
and built in several different facilities.

The O'Days I have most experience with are the smaller ones, except for
the center cockpit 37. That boat is built very solidly, but the details
and fitting out leave something to be desired. Some of their smaller
boats were quite well done. Others were flimsy crap. Seemed to vary
widely and I don't know what years (or corporate ownership) were the
good ones.

In general, I agree that Pearsons are a bit above the average for
mass-produced boats, in some regards. Cal also, and more consistent...

But I'm not sure the Cal is faster in general conditions. In fact, its PHRF is
about 20 to 25 point higher. I think the O'Day would hold its own very nicely,
while giving a more comfortable ride.

The O'Day probably has a considerably more optimized cabin layout too.
They adopted some innovations that Cal ignored.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

But I'm not sure the Cal is faster in general conditions. In fact, its PHRF is
about 20 to 25 point higher. I think the O'Day would hold its own very nicely,
while giving a more comfortable ride.

The Oday is faster in most conditions.

RB