17/12/2014 at 9:16 pm #19327
Poole Week are going to award a prize for the best ‘classic’ Wayfarer defined as Sail Number less than [10,500]. What sail number should be used to define the split between pre MK IV and earlier versions?18/12/2014 at 9:59 am #19328
Well done for acknowledging the difference between a MKIV and other Marks, but is a sail no. the fairest way to define that split? Would weight maybe be a better way of defining a split?
I believe that there is a difference between boats built as cruisers and those built as racers. Racing boats are built down to the minimum weight, whereas I believe those built as “Cruisers” or “Trainers” are generally quite a bit heavier. No matter what the crew weight, the boat weight is always going to be there sapping whatever wind energy is available and can’t be changed. Whereas extra crew weight can be useful for hiking in stronger winds, the boat weight simply slows it down.
Some wooden boats are also built down to the minimum weight, while others are much heavier.
How to weigh them? In race trim, about to be launched on the water. Using bathroom scales, one under each wheel and the nose of the trolley with small ramps both onto and off the scales and then add the 3 weights together . After launch, the trolleys could be weighed to give a final boat weight in race trim.
The biggest problem with the above is that it increases logistics quite a bit on day 1 of a regatta and needs a bit of manpower.
But might it be a way to encourage heavier/older boats to come to more race meetings?
As to the actual query you posted, I sorry, I have no idea what the split no. would be? But a great idea to acknowledge there are differences and maybe encourage more participants.
Davdor18/12/2014 at 7:32 pm #19329
The weighing is not going to happen. Too complex logistics for something that 99% is covered by a simple sail number cut off.
Any one know the number we should use?18/12/2014 at 7:42 pm #19330
posted before adding the bit about how interesting Davdor’s point is. I have no idea how different versions weigh but I suspect that a well maintained +s and woodie would be close to minimum weight so may not achieve the desired result of encouraging older boats.
At our club we have had lots of discussions about the perceived disadvantage of not having a Mk IV design – and not being willing or able to upgrade to a much more expensive craft from fully functioning older boats. For 2015 we are using ‘classic’ to try out how well it works. In club racing this replaces silver fleet (which was mixed models) and the club volunteered a classic prize for Poole Week but the lady writing the NOR needs the sail number cut off.13/01/2015 at 6:18 pm #19376
I am so pleased that the issue of boats born to be slow has been raised. Having taken part in two rallies in the Solent this summer once with too much wind and once with too little it dawned on me that no matter how hard we tried Lizzie B W9922 was condemned to life in the “slow lane”.
The only way we get on even terms with Now or Never in very light winds was by launching our asymmetrical spinnaker despite N.o.N being much older. Similarly when we sailed on the aborted Bembridge rally we really struggled to keep up with Chris Tyler in Chreselen W28. I am convinced that it is nothing to do with my skill (or lack of it) as a helm and is all to do with the fact that Lizzie B was built for a sailing school. (How does one establish the genetics of a Wayfarer?) Certainly when we carried boats up the shingle on one ice cream rally Lizze B was one of the heaviest, but very difficult to be objective about the weight of a boat lifted by 8 people!
We are not in a position to upgrade so perhaps I should swallow my pride, just be happy that Lizzie B is fit for purpose and learn how to sail better and try harder!22/01/2015 at 9:17 pm #19431
according to wayfarer website (info) first hartly was 10506
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.