Re: Stus-List listed weights/more PHRF

[Ronald B. Frerker via CnC-List]

 J boats used to go the other way and tell PHRF a high number so folks sailing 
the boat would do well.  The classic was the J22 when it first came out; Jboats 
suggested a number of 192.  What we saw was a boat as fast as the J24, 
especially in light airs.  The J24 was 174.Since the winning boat usually sails 
about 18sec/mi faster than the handicap, it made the J22 almost an instant 
winner.RonWild CheriC 30-1STL

On Monday, December 16, 2019, 04:14:47 PM CST, Gary Nylander via CnC-List 
 wrote:  
 
 
I seem to recall a story about C 99 number one. When it was shipped to 
Annapolis for the boat show, it was “not quite done”, so the story goes. It had 
a cobbled together interior – I heard it was made of some 110 parts, but cut 
down and very light.

  

Then the boat was shown at the show and sailed around and left in Annapolis - 
and the designer and a carefully selected crew of hot shots sailed it around 
and kicked butt in a big way. Nice handicap indicating a very fast 32 footer. I 
understand it was very hard for mere mortals to match that handicap. 

  

True? Beats me, but the PHRF guys adjusted the rating somewhat later.



  ___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Richard Bush via CnC-List]

 Rob, thank you for jumping in on this...your explanation is very helpful; can 
you elaborate on how those design weights and specs affect the normally used 
ratios; SA to displacement; displacement to length, and Ball-Displacement?  Are 
the "design" numbers used or are the boats weighed?  Also, not of importance, 
but I would love to know, historically, which boats, or lines you considered as 
your competition? Lastly, thank you for for the 37 it is as beautiful today as 
when it left your factory in 1985(as was my 25, 29, and 33)...
 
Richard
 s/v Bushmark4: 1985 C 37 CB; Ohio River, Mile 596...buried under snow...
Richard N. Bush Law Offices 
2950 Breckenridge Lane, Suite Nine 
Louisville, Kentucky 40220-1462 
502-584-7255 
 
-Original Message-
From: Rob Ball via CnC-List 
To: Donald Kern ; Shawn Wright via CnC-List 

Cc: Rob Ball 
Sent: Tue, Dec 17, 2019 8:59 am
Subject: Re: Stus-List listed weights

#yiv7092277699 #yiv7092277699 -- _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} 
_filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} #yiv7092277699 #yiv7092277699 
p.yiv7092277699MsoNormal, #yiv7092277699 li.yiv7092277699MsoNormal, 
#yiv7092277699 div.yiv7092277699MsoNormal 
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:black;}
 #yiv7092277699 a:link, #yiv7092277699 span.yiv7092277699MsoHyperlink 
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;} #yiv7092277699 a:visited, 
#yiv7092277699 span.yiv7092277699MsoHyperlinkFollowed 
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;} #yiv7092277699 pre 
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:10.0pt;color:black;} #yiv7092277699 
p.yiv7092277699msonormal0, #yiv7092277699 li.yiv7092277699msonormal0, 
#yiv7092277699 div.yiv7092277699msonormal0 
{margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:black;}
 #yiv7092277699 span.yiv7092277699HTMLPreformattedChar 
{font-family:serif;color:black;} #yiv7092277699 span.yiv7092277699EmailStyle21 
{font-family:Rounded MT sans-serif;color:windowtext;} #yiv7092277699 
.yiv7092277699MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered {} #yiv7092277699 
div.yiv7092277699WordSection1 {} #yiv7092277699 When I, or any other designer, 
starts out a project, he makes a decision about what weight the design is aimed 
at.  Then create a hull shape that has that exact volume.  Then the rest of the 
design follows suit. Meanwhile, if a company wants to sell any of these, some 
specs need to be available so they have something to explain. So, the predicted 
displacement number gets set. After that the details of the design are 
completed,  the structure is planned, the number of coats of varnish are 
decided, and anywhere along this path you can see that the original predicted 
displacement is totally lost . . .  but it’s still out there as the published 
number . . . When the first boat is launched, we’re now many months away from 
that original prediction, and back then – it’s the first indication of what the 
boat actually weighs . . . I feel that much of our success at C was the 
ability to predict a finished weight and have the boat come out close to that 
number.  Our competitors often went to the latest hot designer, got a nice 
design, that was maybe even a lot lighter than we were doing.  Aha – should be 
a world beater – right ?  But . . . . they didn’t build a boat lighter than we 
did and more likely a bit heavier. So – we had a C relatively heavy for it’s 
size and a competitor’s boat which was designed to be light, but actually 
wasn’t.  The C had a sailplan and stability to match it’s weight, but the 
other guys had a boat that was considerably overweight and probably 
underpowered as a result. As the years went by, I had a more and more 
sophisticated ability, and understanding of what we were doing so I could do a 
design, see it built, and have the design and actual be closer and closer. I 
really felt (feel) that we outsmarted the rest of the world for a long time.  
Of course in our computer age, it’s much easier to design a boat now. You can 
do the whole design, do a weight study, and then change the hull shape, keel 
weight, or sailplan at the very last minute to match the weight.       Rob Ball
C 34___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --  https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[dwight veinot via CnC-List]

Rob Ball to you have a keel shoe or split torpedo bulb on your 34?

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 9:59 AM Rob Ball via CnC-List 
wrote:

> When I, or any other designer, starts out a project, he makes a decision
> about what weight the design is aimed at.  Then create a hull shape that
> has that exact volume.  Then the rest of the design follows suit.
>
> Meanwhile, if a company wants to sell any of these, some specs need to be
> available so they have something to explain.
>
> So, the predicted displacement number gets set.
>
> After that the details of the design are completed,  the structure is
> planned, the number of coats of varnish are decided, and anywhere along
> this path you can see that the original predicted displacement is totally
> lost . . .  but it’s still out there as the published number . . .
>
> When the first boat is launched, we’re now many months away from that
> original prediction, and back then – it’s the first indication of what the
> boat actually weighs . . .
>
> I feel that much of our success at C was the ability to predict a
> finished weight and have the boat come out close to that number.  Our
> competitors often went to the latest hot designer, got a nice design, that
> was maybe even a lot lighter than we were doing.  Aha – should be a world
> beater – right ?  But . . . . they didn’t build a boat lighter than we did
> and more likely a bit heavier.
>
> So – we had a C relatively heavy for it’s size and a competitor’s boat
> which was designed to be light, but actually wasn’t.  The C had a
> sailplan and stability to match it’s weight, but the other guys had a boat
> that was considerably overweight and probably underpowered as a result.
>
> As the years went by, I had a more and more sophisticated ability, and
> understanding of what we were doing so I could do a design, see it built,
> and have the design and actual be closer and closer.
>
> I really felt (feel) that we outsmarted the rest of the world for a long
> time.
>
> Of course in our computer age, it’s much easier to design a boat now. You
> can do the whole design, do a weight study, and then change the hull shape,
> keel weight, or sailplan at the very last minute to match the weight.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Rob Ball*
> *C 34*
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
> --
Sent from Gmail Mobile
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Rob Ball via CnC-List]

When I, or any other designer, starts out a project, he makes a decision about 
what weight the design is aimed at.  Then create a hull shape that has that 
exact volume.  Then the rest of the design follows suit.
Meanwhile, if a company wants to sell any of these, some specs need to be 
available so they have something to explain.
So, the predicted displacement number gets set.
After that the details of the design are completed,  the structure is planned, 
the number of coats of varnish are decided, and anywhere along this path you 
can see that the original predicted displacement is totally lost . . .  but 
it’s still out there as the published number . . .
When the first boat is launched, we’re now many months away from that original 
prediction, and back then – it’s the first indication of what the boat actually 
weighs . . .
I feel that much of our success at C was the ability to predict a finished 
weight and have the boat come out close to that number.  Our competitors often 
went to the latest hot designer, got a nice design, that was maybe even a lot 
lighter than we were doing.  Aha – should be a world beater – right ?  But . . 
. . they didn’t build a boat lighter than we did and more likely a bit heavier.
So – we had a C relatively heavy for it’s size and a competitor’s boat which 
was designed to be light, but actually wasn’t.  The C had a sailplan and 
stability to match it’s weight, but the other guys had a boat that was 
considerably overweight and probably underpowered as a result.
As the years went by, I had a more and more sophisticated ability, and 
understanding of what we were doing so I could do a design, see it built, and 
have the design and actual be closer and closer.
I really felt (feel) that we outsmarted the rest of the world for a long time.
Of course in our computer age, it’s much easier to design a boat now. You can 
do the whole design, do a weight study, and then change the hull shape, keel 
weight, or sailplan at the very last minute to match the weight.


Rob Ball
C 34
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[sv Rebecca Leah via CnC-List]

My Landfall 39 tipped the travel lift scales at 23800, in full live aboard 
status. Doug Mountjoy Sv Rebecca Leah C LF39253-208-1412Port Orchard YC wa.
null___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Donald Kern via CnC-List]

Shawn,
Did the marna forget to look below and pump out the 2 1/2 tons of water 
that was up to the v-berth ??

Don
Fireball C 35 Mk2

On 12/16/2019 6:55 PM, Shawn Wright via CnC-List wrote:
I was told by the crane operator that my 35-2 weighed 19,000 lbs at 
haulout, which seems a bit excessive, even with full tanks and 
cruising gear. The crane is limited to 20,000 lbs, and since at least 
two other larger boats were hauled at the same time (Cabot 36 - 17,800 
rated and Hughes 38 - 14,800 rated), I have my doubts about this 
figure. I would like to know the actual weight though. Two larger 
boats in our club, a Landfall 42 and a 40-2, manage to get hauled by 
the crane after a weight reduction exercise.

--
Shawn Wright
shawngwri...@gmail.com 
S/V Callisto, 1974 C 35
https://www.facebook.com/SVCallisto


On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 1:03 PM CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List 
mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>> wrote:


Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I
would call it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a
person who would pour over data and specifications to make a
buying decision and the sales guys know us and simply change the
manufacturing specs to sell product.  As a resuIt, I never believe
manufacturers' specs.

Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R


On December 16, 2019 at 1:36 PM Gary Nylander via CnC-List
mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com>> wrote:

The listed weight of the 30-1 on the spec sheets is 8000#. I
doubt there was ever one that light. The ones which have been
weighed seem to hover around 9000. After looking at Rich’s #1, I
can see a lot of differences, such as his chainplate system. And,
after seeing pictures of other boats – mine has the teak and
holly floor throughout, a sump pump for the shower, pressure
water, hot water heater, two batteries, and the three burner
propane stove/oven which were accessories.

From some earlier comments by owners, I don’t think the raising
of the boom did much for performance, but it did relieve a lot of
headaches.

And I agree with Michael, the boat does quite well in 15 knots
and above.

Gary


___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. 
Each and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support
the list - use PayPal to send contribution --
https://www.paypal.me/stumurray


___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray



___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Shawn Wright via CnC-List]

I was told by the crane operator that my 35-2 weighed 19,000 lbs at
haulout, which seems a bit excessive, even with full tanks and cruising
gear. The crane is limited to 20,000 lbs, and since at least two other
larger boats were hauled at the same time (Cabot 36 - 17,800 rated and
Hughes 38 - 14,800 rated), I have my doubts about this figure. I would like
to know the actual weight though. Two larger boats in our club, a Landfall
42 and a 40-2, manage to get hauled by the crane after a weight reduction
exercise.
--
Shawn Wright
shawngwri...@gmail.com
S/V Callisto, 1974 C 35
https://www.facebook.com/SVCallisto


On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 1:03 PM CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List <
cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote:

> Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I would
> call it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a person who would
> pour over data and specifications to make a buying decision and the sales
> guys know us and simply change the manufacturing specs to sell product.  As
> a resuIt, I never believe manufacturers' specs.
>
> Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R
>
>
>
> On December 16, 2019 at 1:36 PM Gary Nylander via CnC-List <
> cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote:
>
> The listed weight of the 30-1 on the spec sheets is 8000#. I doubt there
> was ever one that light. The ones which have been weighed seem to hover
> around 9000. After looking at Rich’s #1, I can see a lot of differences,
> such as his chainplate system. And, after seeing pictures of other boats –
> mine has the teak and holly floor throughout, a sump pump for the shower,
> pressure water, hot water heater, two batteries, and the three burner
> propane stove/oven which were accessories.
>
>
>
> From some earlier comments by owners, I don’t think the raising of the
> boom did much for performance, but it did relieve a lot of headaches.
>
>
>
> And I agree with Michael, the boat does quite well in 15 knots and above.
>
>
>
> Gary
>
> ___
>
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each
> and every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list -
> use PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
>
>
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Dennis C. via CnC-List]

Absolutely!  To the pound. Hahahaha! /S

Dennis C. 
Touché 35-1 #83
Mandeville, LA

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 16, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Joe Della Barba via CnC-List 
>  wrote:
> 
> So does the 35 MK I really weigh 10,500 pounds?
> 
> Joe
> 
> Coquina
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12/16/2019 4:02 PM, CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List wrote:
>> Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I would 
>> call it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a person who would 
>> pour over data and specifications to make a buying decision and the sales 
>> guys know us and simply change the manufacturing specs to sell product.  As 
>> a resuIt, I never believe manufacturers' specs.  
>> 
>> Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R
>> 
>> 
> ___
> 
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
> 
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Gary Nylander via CnC-List]

I seem to recall a story about C 99 number one. When it was shipped to 
Annapolis for the boat show, it was “not quite done”, so the story goes. It had 
a cobbled together interior – I heard it was made of some 110 parts, but cut 
down and very light.

 

Then the boat was shown at the show and sailed around and left in Annapolis - 
and the designer and a carefully selected crew of hot shots sailed it around 
and kicked butt in a big way. Nice handicap indicating a very fast 32 footer. I 
understand it was very hard for mere mortals to match that handicap. 

 

True? Beats me, but the PHRF guys adjusted the rating somewhat later.

 

Gary  

 

From: CnC-List  On Behalf Of Charlie Nelson via 
CnC-List
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:45 PM
To: cnc-list@cnc-list.com
Cc: cenel...@aol.com
Subject: Re: Stus-List listed weights

 

+1 to Chuck regarding marketing.  

 

OTOH, given the potential variations in the layup of our 'not one design boats' 
as they were manufactured, with different masts, keels, interior fit-outs, etc. 
etc., I doubt that even the designer/builder knows how much the boat weighs 
when it leaves the factory. 

 

As a minor example, when I had my centerboard rebuilt for my 1995 36 XL/kcb, I 
contacted Rob Ball who designed the boat to ask how much lead to add to the 
inside of the fiberglass board. I could not find a reference to this in any 
drawings I was able to obtain after C went out of business.

 

I don't recall his exact words but they were something like "...we poured lead 
or lead shot inside the fiberglass until it looked pretty full...". The board 
or the boat were never weighed at the factory.

 

The yard who rebuilt the board did the same and they started a pool among the 
workers who estimated how much it would weigh when filled. Turned out it 
weighed in at 924 lbs and the office secretary won the pool!!

 

Unless one of our boats is weighed or measured for a rating certificate, its 
estimated weight/displacement/etc. is mostly a guesstimate with a wide 
(probably +/- 10%) range IMHO.

 

Charlie Nelson

Water Phantom

1995 C 36XL/kcb

 

-Original Message-
From: CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com> >
To: cnc-list mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com> >
Cc: CHARLES SCHEAFFER mailto:cscheaf...@comcast.net> >
Sent: Mon, Dec 16, 2019 4:03 pm
Subject: Re: Stus-List listed weights

Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I would call 
it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a person who would pour over 
data and specifications to make a buying decision and the sales guys know us 
and simply change the manufacturing specs to sell product.  As a resuIt, I 
never believe manufacturers' specs.   

 

Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R 

 

  

On December 16, 2019 at 1:36 PM Gary Nylander via CnC-List 
mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > wrote: 

The listed weight of the 30-1 on the spec sheets is 8000#. I doubt there was 
ever one that light. The ones which have been weighed seem to hover around 
9000. After looking at Rich’s #1, I can see a lot of differences, such as his 
chainplate system. And, after seeing pictures of other boats – mine has the 
teak and holly floor throughout, a sump pump for the shower, pressure water, 
hot water heater, two batteries, and the three burner propane stove/oven which 
were accessories. 

  

>From some earlier comments by owners, I don’t think the raising of the boom 
>did much for performance, but it did relieve a lot of headaches. 

  

And I agree with Michael, the boat does quite well in 15 knots and above. 

  

Gary 

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --  https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Charlie Nelson via CnC-List]

+1 to Chuck regarding marketing. 
OTOH, given the potential variations in the layup of our 'not one design boats' 
as they were manufactured, with different masts, keels, interior fit-outs, etc. 
etc., I doubt that even the designer/builder knows how much the boat weighs 
when it leaves the factory. 
As a minor example, when I had my centerboard rebuilt for my 1995 36 XL/kcb, I 
contacted Rob Ball who designed the boat to ask how much lead to add to the 
inside of the fiberglass board. I could not find a reference to this in any 
drawings I was able to obtain after C went out of business.
I don't recall his exact words but they were something like "...we poured lead 
or lead shot inside the fiberglass until it looked pretty full...". The board 
or the boat were never weighed at the factory.
The yard who rebuilt the board did the same and they started a pool among the 
workers who estimated how much it would weigh when filled. Turned out it 
weighed in at 924 lbs and the office secretary won the pool!!
Unless one of our boats is weighed or measured for a rating certificate, its 
estimated weight/displacement/etc. is mostly a guesstimate with a wide 
(probably +/- 10%) range IMHO.
Charlie NelsonWater Phantom1995 C 36XL/kcb

-Original Message-
From: CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List 
To: cnc-list 
Cc: CHARLES SCHEAFFER 
Sent: Mon, Dec 16, 2019 4:03 pm
Subject: Re: Stus-List listed weights

  Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I would call 
it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a person who would pour over 
data and specifications to make a buying decision and the sales guys know us 
and simply change the manufacturing specs to sell product.  As a resuIt, I 
never believe manufacturers' specs.     
   Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R   
      
 On December 16, 2019 at 1:36 PM Gary Nylander via CnC-List 
 wrote: 
 
  The listed weight of the 30-1 on the spec sheets is 8000#. I doubt there was 
ever one that light. The ones which have been weighed seem to hover around 
9000. After looking at Rich’s #1, I can see a lot of differences, such as his 
chainplate system. And, after seeing pictures of other boats – mine has the 
teak and holly floor throughout, a sump pump for the shower, pressure water, 
hot water heater, two batteries, and the three burner propane stove/oven which 
were accessories.      From some earlier comments by owners, I don’t think the 
raising of the boom did much for performance, but it did relieve a lot of 
headaches.      And I agree with Michael, the boat does quite well in 15 knots 
and above.      Gary   
  ___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --  https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[Joe Della Barba via CnC-List]

So does the 35 MK I really weigh 10,500 pounds?

Joe

Coquina


On 12/16/2019 4:02 PM, CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List wrote:
Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I 
would call it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a person 
who would pour over data and specifications to make a buying decision 
and the sales guys know us and simply change the manufacturing specs 
to sell product.  As a resuIt, I never believe manufacturers' specs.


Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R


___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Re: Stus-List listed weights

[CHARLES SCHEAFFER via CnC-List]

Sometimes marketing people adjust specifications to sell boats.  I would call 
it lying, but sales people call it marketing.  I'm a person who would pour over 
data and specifications to make a buying decision and the sales guys know us 
and simply change the manufacturing specs to sell product.  As a resuIt, I 
never believe manufacturers' specs.  

Chuck Scheaffer, Resolute, 1989 C 34R



> On December 16, 2019 at 1:36 PM Gary Nylander via CnC-List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> The listed weight of the 30-1 on the spec sheets is 8000#. I doubt there 
> was ever one that light. The ones which have been weighed seem to hover 
> around 9000. After looking at Rich’s #1, I can see a lot of differences, such 
> as his chainplate system. And, after seeing pictures of other boats – mine 
> has the teak and holly floor throughout, a sump pump for the shower, pressure 
> water, hot water heater, two batteries, and the three burner propane 
> stove/oven which were accessories.
> 
>  
> 
> From some earlier comments by owners, I don’t think the raising of the 
> boom did much for performance, but it did relieve a lot of headaches.
> 
>  
> 
> And I agree with Michael, the boat does quite well in 15 knots and above.
> 
>  
> 
> Gary
> 
___

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray