"Frank Maier" wrote in message
om...
DSK wrote :
...snip...
BTW I noticed that nobody has yet mentioned "small cockpits" or
recommended double enders...

After all that worthwhile discussion, there you go starting ****
again! grin

You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF
we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small
cockpit."

Frank

Great idea. I love the Southern Cross 31 (although I think
it could use a little more stick), and the SC39 is a nice boat.
The Valiant 40 is a great all round cruising boat (so is the
Esprit 37). Both are really well mannered. Bob Perry
owned and raced a 37 for a number of years and got
killed by a well sailed Cal 33 with a gift rating, but hey
they had fun.

I could go for a Tayana 37 as a cruising boat (the ketch rig
on this design is better than a cutter, as much as it pains me
to say it). If your tastes for teak run higher there is always the
Tashiba/Baba/Tayanas. And don't forget the Fast Passage 39.

Are we going to talk about the Moses theory of a double
ender parting the waves? Actually, they typically do have
good balance between fore and aft volume, so that should help
in running off. But, if you're being overtaken by an eight foot
breaking sea I don't think it matters what the stern shape
looks like, your boots are going to get wet.

The Norwegians came up with the seaworthy
double ender for their pilot boats (I was going to type
Redniskote but I'm sure I'd spell it wrong). But it's interesting
that the British, under nearly identical sea conditions came up
with their plumb stemmed, long waterline cutters for their
pilot service. I guess that just goes to show you that a good
boat is a good boat, no matter what her fanny looks like.

Oh, and as for small cockpits, I've always thought that it's
easier to remedy a too big cockpit than a too small one.
Whatever you do, don't forget to put big drains in.

Matt

One of the best features my double ender, a Tayana 37, is its' tight and
secure small cockpit. When I settle into it on a warm summer night,
there is no better feeling.

I think I'd better stop. I'm starting to excite myself.

Fair winds - Dan Best


Matt/Meribeth Pedersen wrote:
"Frank Maier" wrote in message
om...

DSK wrote :
...snip...

BTW I noticed that nobody has yet mentioned "small cockpits" or
recommended double enders...

After all that worthwhile discussion, there you go starting ****
again! grin

You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF
we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small
cockpit."

Frank


Great idea. I love the Southern Cross 31 (although I think
it could use a little more stick), and the SC39 is a nice boat.
The Valiant 40 is a great all round cruising boat (so is the
Esprit 37). Both are really well mannered. Bob Perry
owned and raced a 37 for a number of years and got
killed by a well sailed Cal 33 with a gift rating, but hey
they had fun.

I could go for a Tayana 37 as a cruising boat (the ketch rig
on this design is better than a cutter, as much as it pains me
to say it). If your tastes for teak run higher there is always the
Tashiba/Baba/Tayanas. And don't forget the Fast Passage 39.

Are we going to talk about the Moses theory of a double
ender parting the waves? Actually, they typically do have
good balance between fore and aft volume, so that should help
in running off. But, if you're being overtaken by an eight foot
breaking sea I don't think it matters what the stern shape
looks like, your boots are going to get wet.

The Norwegians came up with the seaworthy
double ender for their pilot boats (I was going to type
Redniskote but I'm sure I'd spell it wrong). But it's interesting
that the British, under nearly identical sea conditions came up
with their plumb stemmed, long waterline cutters for their
pilot service. I guess that just goes to show you that a good
boat is a good boat, no matter what her fanny looks like.

Oh, and as for small cockpits, I've always thought that it's
easier to remedy a too big cockpit than a too small one.
Whatever you do, don't forget to put big drains in.

Matt



--
Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448
B-2/75 1977-1979
Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean"
http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG

"Frank Maier" wrote...
You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF
we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small
cockpit."

As long as I don't start getting spam about how to enlarge it....


Matt/Meribeth Pedersen wrote:
Are we going to talk about the Moses theory of a double
ender parting the waves?

If running with a drogue, sure. IMHO your idea about the balance between
reserve bouyancy fore & aft is right on.


The Norwegians came up with the seaworthy
double ender for their pilot boats (I was going to type
Redniskote but I'm sure I'd spell it wrong).

Far be it from me to criticize anybody's spelling. The Redningskoite
originated as a fisheries service & rescue boat, developed by a Scotsman
named (fanfare of trumpets) Colin Archer.

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/Ingrid.html

The funny thing about the Colin Archer designs is that most people who
profess to love the type don't really know anything about them... for
example, extolling heavy displacement and moderate reserve bouyancy
aft... whereas these boats were built as light as possible for the
strength required, given the technology of the day, and one of the big
changes Colin Archer made in previous design was to dramatically
increase reserve bouyancy.

The Valiant series is an interesting case study... they are not in any
way related to the Colin Archer type, having wall sides, snubbed canoe
sterns, and fin keels. Bob Perry once said in an unguarded moment that
the Valiat resulted when he took a moderate displacement fin keeler and
had fun making it look like a pirate ship. But not to hold that against
them, they are good boats and darn well built. And to the superficial
glance, they do *look* like a Colin Archer....

The Westsail 32 is another boat often hailed as a modern Colin Archer,
but isn't even close.

... But it's interesting
that the British, under nearly identical sea conditions came up
with their plumb stemmed, long waterline cutters for their
pilot service. I guess that just goes to show you that a good
boat is a good boat, no matter what her fanny looks like.

One thing to keep in mind is that those old timers had a lot more
patience than we do, and a much higher tolerance for user-unfriendly
systems. These boats sail more like submarines than a modern sailor is
likely to put up with.



Oh, and as for small cockpits, I've always thought that it's
easier to remedy a too big cockpit than a too small one.
Whatever you do, don't forget to put big drains in.

How about an open transom? Can't get much more drain area than that. The
issue is to keep the reserve bouyancy figures similar.



Bob Whitaker wrote:
Well, Frank, since you brought it up, I feel compelled to reply. It
seems, that Doug could be a good contributor if he wanted to.

Dear Bob-
You take yourself, and me, and probably everybody else far too seriously.

As for "Blue Water Cruiser" that is strictly an advertising phrase.

Most sailors who actually cross oceans call their boats passage makers,
and there is a tremendous amount of discussion (informed and otherwise)
on what characteristics make for a desirable passage making sailboat. It
appears to me that the most important feature is between the skippers
ears, all else is a matter of familiarity, prejudice, and personal taste.

People have crossed oceans in waterproofed refrigerator crates, so a
real sailboat would have to be pretty bad before it couldn't do it. OTOH
you will find a large number of people with some experience in a given
type of boat who will vigorously proclaim that this is the ONLY type of
ocean capable boat. YMMV

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Doug King wrote:

Dear Bob-
You take [...] me [...] far too seriously.

Thanks for pointing that out... I'll try not to make the same mistake
in the future

As for "Blue Water Cruiser" that is strictly an
advertising phrase.

And the fact that it's a "marketing term" makes it acceptable to be
rude to anyone who uses the term, right? How is that _ANY_ different
from the other rude behavior which we see in this newsgroup? Or is it
OK for _SOME_ members to be rude but not others? Maybe it takes an
outsider to tell it like it is, Doug, but once in a while you tend to
behave in the same manner as the creatures you despise. My Mom told me
once that: "--Only your mother will tell you if you have bad breath."
and Doug, sometimes you have bad breath. Everybody is entitled to make
mistakes and you made a mistake. Whether you recognize it or not is a
different matter and remains to be seen. I will assume that deep down
inside you truly regret your snotty comment which opened this entire
thread and that you would take it back if you could (even if you are
loath to admit it). Please advise if my assumption is correct or
mistaken.

Bob Whitaker
"Disinfecting the world, one toilet at a time."

Bob Whitaker wrote:
And the fact that it's a "marketing term" makes it acceptable to be
rude to anyone who uses the term, right?

Oh grow up.

Fresh Breezes
Doug King

Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" wrote:

Oh grow up.


There you go, Ladies and Gentlemen, Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" in
his own words. All he had to say is: "--Yes Bob, you are right. I was
just trying to be funny. I'm sorry I was rude." That's all he needed
to say Ladies and Gentlemen. But, instead, when coming face to face
with his rude behavior his response is: "--Grow up." I wonder who's
the one that needs to do some growing up around here? That's too bad,
Doug, as we were really rooting for you on the sidelines. We were
really hoping you were truly different from the riff-raff you are so
fond of pontificating against. I guess you have shown your true mettle
(or lack thereof).

Fresh Toilets- Bob Whitaker

"Disinfecting the world, one toilet at a time... but I guess there's
some outhouses that are just festering cesspools and should be filled
in rather than disinfected."


DSK wrote in message ...
Bob Whitaker wrote:
And the fact that it's a "marketing term" makes it acceptable to be
rude to anyone who uses the term, right?

Oh grow up.

Fresh Breezes
Doug King

Bob Whitaker wrote:
There you go, Ladies and Gentlemen, Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" in
his own words.

In your own words, you seem to be obsessed with toilets.


... All he had to say is: "--Yes Bob, you are right. I was
just trying to be funny. I'm sorry I was rude."

But I have no need or desire to apologize. If I was rude, it was rather
mild. Your reaction has been on a scale with BittyBill and Jax... both
of whom are buffoons. Do I care about their opinions? Should I care
about yours?

In your first post, you displayed a number of prejudices regarding
offshore sailing, and that you weren't really interested in advice
unless it was either agreed with your prejudices or was offered ever so
humbley.

I *did* offer some good advice, although without any apology whatever
for disagreeing with your prejudices. You got all ****y because I popped
your balloon. Life is tough sometimes.

DSK

dougies tells one and all:

I have no need or desire to apologize

and explains thusly:

I was rude, it was rather
mild.

and continues:

Should I care
about yours (opinion)?


DSK

Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" wrote:

But I have no need or desire to apologize.

Need, my dear friend, yes. Desire? It has been well established you
don't.

In your first post, you displayed [...] that you
weren't really interested in advice

Is that so? Then why would I post a question in the first place? Maybe
you've forgotten my first post. Why don't you re-read it. Why on earth
would I say: "--What other boats do folks recommend?" if I wasn't
really interested in their advice? I'm sorry but it's just too easy to
pick your arguments apart Doug

I *did* offer some good advice,

Yes, you did offer _SOME_ advice. I'll grant you that. For those who
may not have seen the first post, I show Doug's "good" advice below:

On a message dated: 2004-03-12 08:31:43 PST Doug "The Fresh Toilet
King" wrote:

My first advice is to drop the phrase "blue water cruiser."
It makes you sound like you want to be the Tidy Bowl man.


By his own account Doug King is a bit confused and thinks that people
who use the term "blue water" are talking about toilet disinfectants.
As stated earlier he probably thinks that the term "green water"
refers to the competing brand. Who knows what he thinks when he hears
the term getting "pooped".

I'm sorry Doug, but you are just too easy a target. You were rude.
Admit it. In your own words you said: "--If I was rude, it was rather
mild." And I will grant you that as well. It was rather mild and it
was rather entertaining at that. But rude nonetheless.

You got all ****y because I popped
your balloon.

Wrong, again! I'm rather entertained by the whole brouhaha. Soundly
defeating you at your own game is rather entertaining if not very
challenging. It seems like you are the one getting all ****y because
somebody has called your bluff.

Since we are offering each other advice, here's some advice for you:
My advice is for you to stick to sailing in your posts. You are smart,
knowledgeable and experienced. People could benefit from what you have
to say, instead of just dismissing posts signed by "DSK". Try to let
people come to respect your opinion by the quality of your posts and
don't try to get snotty with strangers. The world would be a better
place for it.

Fresh Toilets- Bob Whitaker



DSK wrote in message ...
Bob Whitaker wrote:
There you go, Ladies and Gentlemen, Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" in
his own words.

In your own words, you seem to be obsessed with toilets.


... All he had to say is: "--Yes Bob, you are right. I was
just trying to be funny. I'm sorry I was rude."

But I have no need or desire to apologize. If I was rude, it was rather
mild. Your reaction has been on a scale with BittyBill and Jax... both
of whom are buffoons. Do I care about their opinions? Should I care
about yours?

In your first post, you displayed a number of prejudices regarding
offshore sailing, and that you weren't really interested in advice
unless it was either agreed with your prejudices or was offered ever so
humbley.

I *did* offer some good advice, although without any apology whatever
for disagreeing with your prejudices. You got all ****y because I popped
your balloon. Life is tough sometimes.

DSK

Bob, keep in mind that dougies got to be too old to sail his Nimrod 19.

Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" wrote:

Oh grow up.


There you go, Ladies and Gentlemen, Doug "The Fresh Toilet King" in
his own words. All he had to say is: "--Yes Bob, you are right. I was
just trying to be funny. I'm sorry I was rude." That's all he needed
to say Ladies and Gentlemen. But, instead, when coming face to face
with his rude behavior his response is: "--Grow up." I wonder who's
the one that needs to do some growing up around here? That's too bad,
Doug, as we were really rooting for you on the sidelines. We were
really hoping you were truly different from the riff-raff you are so
fond of pontificating against. I guess you have shown your true mettle
(or lack thereof).

Fresh Toilets- Bob Whitaker

"Disinfecting the world, one toilet at a time... but I guess there's
some outhouses that are just festering cesspools and should be filled
in rather than disinfected."


DSK wrote in message
t...
Bob Whitaker wrote:
And the fact that it's a "marketing term" makes it acceptable to be
rude to anyone who uses the term, right?

Oh grow up.

Fresh Breezes
Doug King