I thought the shorter boom was due to designers placing the mast further back to get a large J measurement so 150% genoas were bigger. More sail area overall.
Chuck S > On 11/03/2022 2:16 PM Hoyt, Mike via CnC-List <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > wrote: > > > > I believe that large mainsails were penalized under IOR at that time so > huge foretriangles became popular and also very large overlapping genoas. > > > > If I am not mistaken IMS and other rules that followed IOR were more > based on performance than design and allowed larger main sails to come back > and resulted in smaller more easily managed headsails > > > > My conspiracy theory is that the deck sweeping 170% genoas were heavily > influenced by insurance companies and boat yards that wanted more collisions > and more work! 😊 > > > > Mike > > Persistence > > HAlifax > > > > From: Ronald B. Frerker via CnC-List <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > Sent: November 3, 2022 3:04 PM > To: Stus-List <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > Cc: Ronald B. Frerker <rbfrer...@yahoo.com> > Subject: Stus-List Re: C&C 35 MK I 170% > > > That 170 seemed to be popular sport back in the day. We had one for our > 30-1 when I bought it and I noted that two other 30s at the lake had them > also. > > PHRF killed that sail; the additional penalty was deemed too much. Crew > didn't mind tossing them away. By the time we finally got it trimmed in, it > was time to tack again. > > Ron > > Wild Cheri > > C&C 30-1 > > STL > > > > > > On Thursday, November 3, 2022, 11:22:32 AM CDT, Hoyt, Mike via CnC-List > <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote: > > > > > > Jeff > > > > That would likely sheet to the dinghy towed behind your 34 > > > > There was a story behind the use of 170 genoas back in the day but I > forget what it was > > > > Mike Hoyt > > Persistence > > >
