March 2012 - montgomery_boats - mailman.xmission.com

Re: M_Boats: (no subject)
by SALGLESSER＠aol.com 18 Mar '12

18 Mar '12

No problem Tod, We'll make the 22' hull and deck from that new composite of Oxygen, Nitrogen and Jerry-gen. the mast will be unobtanium alloy, Ballast will be Salium, dense when wet, but light when dry. Martian low cost labor will help, but shipping costs might be up there? Send your deposit to me in US dollars cash. sal M15 "Justus" '86 #361 - Jerry built In a message dated 3/16/2012 9:12:23 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, htmills(a)zoominternet.net writes: What we need is a boat about 22' long, weighs 500# with a mast raised by hand so light a 5 year old could manage it, costs $10,000 or less (including trailer). What is so tough about that????? Lol Tod > -----Original Message----- > From: montgomery_boats-bounces(a)mailman.xmission.com > [mailto:montgomery_boats-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of > jerry montgomery > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 6:52 PM > To: montgomery forum > Subject: M_Boats: (no subject) > > interesting that people are talking about a larger boat, but I really > don;'t think it's in the cards because of economic reasons. You can > almost price boats by the cube of the length, so if a 17 costs 25K, a > 21 would have to sell for a whopping 46K for the manufacture to stay in > business. There are too many old 20's and 22's on the market for 10K > for this to work in the near future. Possibly a 19, which would only > be a 17 with more elbowroom, but you would also need a mast putter- > upper, a bigger truck, a stronger crew, a 4K suit of sails, etc etc. > > Even so, I'm putting your comments in a folder for long-term safe > keeping! > > jerry > > -- > I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. > We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. > SPAMfighter has removed 6309 of my spam emails to date. > Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len > > The Professional version does not have this message

5 4

Re: M_Boats: a smaller boat
by SALGLESSER＠aol.com 18 Mar '12

18 Mar '12

Hi Jerry W, glad to see you here. Cool boat, thanx for the link. Interesting study. I think Jerry M is seeking exceptional upwind performance. Don't know if "Chine Runners" would deliver. I'd like to hear Jerry M's thoughts on "Chine Runners". Did you get "Robin's Nest" in the water yet? sal '86 M15 #361 - "Justus" In a message dated 3/17/2012 5:34:58 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jerrywlinux(a)comcast.net writes: I find Matt Layden's designs to be intriguing. Who needs a keel when you have "chine runners". See: http://www.microcruising.com/paradox1.htm Jerry W Warrenton VA M-23 "Robin's Nest" On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 17:16 -0400, Conbert Benneck wrote: > On 17-Mar-12 2:54 PM, Tod wrote: > > Hi Jerry, > > I agree with Tod. > > I've had a Dwyer 7'-9" sailing dinghy as well as a 9' Dutch sailing > dinghy we used in Europe. Both had dagger boards. > > When you run aground with a dagger board, your boat comes to a sudden > stop. The forces with the long dagger board lever arm act on the > dagger board trunk against the weight of the occupants in the dinghy. > > The weak spot is the dagger board / hull connection. > > In both boats, after I, or the children sailing around the harbor, hit a > rock or the ground, I had a fracture cracks at the dagger board / hull > joint that caused leakage. > > Those experiences were enough for me. I'd never buy another boat with > a dagger board. I want a centerboard that pivots, so that if there is > a grounding, the board can be lifted up by the obstruction, and not > cause damage to the hull. > > Dagger boards may be the cheapest way to go while building boats, but > the resultant damage to the boat caused by dagger boards hitting rocks > or other hard places, and the resultant leaks that you can never quite > stop from leaking, is not the way to go. > > Neither do I buy into the idea of frangible, disposable, dagger boards > to solve the problem. > > The M15 is ideal. > > I can get close enough to a beach to just step into the water. What > more do you want? > > My Bolger MICRO could be beached and even had steps at the bow so that > you could climb aboard again. > > We never used that feature as long as we owned the MICRO. It was far > easier to drop the swim ladder off the side of the boat and get into the > water that way. > > Katrina and I both loved your M15 interior layout. The large double bed > was referred to as our "suenden wiese" (a meadow for sinning!) in German. > > I think you are going to have great difficulty trying to improve the > existing M15 with a new design. > > Connie & Katrina Benneck > ex M15 #400 LEPPO > > > > I've owned both daggerboard and centerboard small boats and I am not a fan > > of daggerboards. I think you have a keeper with the current > > keel/centerboard combo, but if you really wanted to reduce the trailering > > draft you could draw it up into the hull a bit more, have the pin still > > outside to avoid leaks there. I'd rather a ridge a few inches high inside > > the cabin than a daggerboard trunk dividing it in two. > > > > Open transom is fine. Some kind of cleats for a small gas tank w/ webbing > > hold-down just fwd of rudder head. > > > > Nearly Bare interior with small mounts for an optional single berth > > (something that any owner could build the base of (ply + some stiffeners > > screwed to it) and buy a (hopefully off-the-shelf) rectangular cushion or a > > camping pad. and a place for a porta-potty would be fine. Maybe a few bins > > for duffles that would double as hull stiffeners. Owner could add hooks for > > a cargo net to retain stuff in the bins if desired. Minimal hull liner. > > > > Forward hatch for flow-through ventilation. (I've slept in a cockpit a > > couple of times (open boat) and around here you always wake up covered in > > dew and frequently mosquitoes are an issue, so I NEVER do it given a choice. > > Might be different thing out west.) > > > > Tod > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: montgomery_boats-bounces(a)mailman.xmission.com > >> [mailto:montgomery_boats-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of > >> James Poulakis > >> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 1:04 PM > >> To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats > >> Subject: Re: M_Boats: a smaller boat > >> > >> I was envisioning a semi-rigid but deformable container that would > >> return to it's original shape after impact. When pulling the boat out, > >> the water would empty out of the container the same way it would empty > >> out of your water ballast. > >> > >> My problem with daggerboards on cruisers is that, unlike a centerboard, > >> the daggerboard becomes sacrificial upon impact. > >> > >> Anyway, I'm an admirer of both your and Sal's products and I'm eager to > >> see your next creation. > >> > >> Jim > >> M-17 "Spirit" > >> > >> On Mar 16, 2012, at 7:18 PM, jerry montgomery wrote: > >> > >>> How would you drain the bags when pulling the boat out of the water? > >> Don't see where making the trunk a lot stronger than the DB will be > >> much of a problem, and that's all it needs to be.. If you think of a > >> way, let me know! > >>> jerry > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Poulakis" > >>> <picfo(a)comcast.net> > >>> To: "For and about Montgomery Sailboats" > >>> <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> > >>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 5:48 PM > >>> Subject: Re: M_Boats: a smaller boat > >>> > >>> > >>> Jerry; > >>> Just thinking about DBs, and beaching, and water ballast. > >>> What if part of the water ballast was held in a rubber or plastic > >> container behind the DB? It would act as a cushion against a hard > >> grounding. Kinda the same idea as those water barrels in front of toll > >> booths (they're called Fitch Barriers > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_attenuator ). Since the force of a > >> 800# boat moving at 5 mph is a lot less than a 2500# car moving at 55 > >> mph, perhaps the container could be engineered so that it wouldn't be > >> damaged. So: Sail slowly up to the beach until a squirt of water > >> shoots up out of your DB trunk, then pull up the DB and jump in with > >> the bow line. > >>> Yes, i do have too much time on my hands today. > >>> > >>> Jim > >>> M-17 "Spirit" > >>> > >>> On Mar 16, 2012, at 4:35 PM, jerry montgomery wrote: > >>> > >>>> I'm with you on that- the two reasons we're considering a bulb DB on > >> the smaller Sage is to sit lower on the trailer, and also for the sake > >> of beaching. I have a scheme in mind to make the bulb so that it won't > >> be a kelp catcher and will only hang down from the bottom of the hull > >> by two or three inches. > >>>> This will be a tough decision; a DB would need a very strong trunk > >> in case you hit a rock, but it's the same problem a zillion keelboats > >> have. Also cockpit drainage. The m-15 and Sage both drain forward > >> into the CB turnk and they drain much better than the M-17, which > >> drains aft. When I re-tooled the M-17 in '81 I thought long and hard > >> about changing this, but because the CB on the 17 was so thin I decided > >> that I couldn't get the volumn that the boat deserves. I did raise the > >> cockpit sole I think an inch, but it really didn't make much > >> difference. Draining forward is more better, I think. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> jerry > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Jenkins"<tjenk(a)gte.net> > >>>> To: "For and about Montgomery Sailboats" > >>>> <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> > >>>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 4:11 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: M_Boats: a smaller boat > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Interestinng discussion. The smaller Potter (mine is a 14' Gunter > >> gaff model) is wondrous for poking around in coves and pulling up on > >> beaches, and I towed it many miles with a VW bug. On the other hand, > >> the centerboard trunk takes up too much space, and my M17 sails better > >> in most conditions, and is arguably easier on the eyes. If physical > >> laws could be circumvented, I would like an M15 or 17 with a deep kick- > >> up centerboard that could be pulled flush with the bottom, and no > >> center keel to interfere with beaching. It might need something like > >> the twin beaching keels on British and Dutch boats that are stranded > >> daily on tidal mudflats. Come on, designers, get 'er done. > >>>> n Mar 16, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Daniel Rich wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I really think the idea of the smaller boat is a good one. The > >>>>> Montgomery 15 is about perfect. My only complaint is that you > >> cannot > >>>>> beach it easily. This is where the Potter has an advantage. In > >> every > >>>>> other way the Montgomery is a superior boat. In terms of carbon on > >>>>> the deck, I think it is reasonable to try to reduce costs, and > >> would > >>>>> probably skip that. It would seem like you would sell more boats > >>>>> that way. These cruising boats are really not built for speed > >>>>> anyway. I would keep it simple. They have sold a gazillion of those > >> potters. > >>>>> They are not fast boats. But they're really fun. > >>>>> > >>>>> Daniel > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mar 16, 2012, at 3:05 PM, Tod<htmills(a)zoominternet.net> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Given the aging demographics of sailors, Stan might be onto > >> something. > >>>>>> I haven't seen the interior of the Sage, but have often thought a > >> Spartan-but-comfortable interior in a 21-23 footer would be nice. > >>>>>> It would be a lighter boat than the M23 and with more of a M17 > >> interior except with better cabin ergonomics for comfort. Just > >> separate settee bunks for two, a spot for a porta-potty behind a > >> curtain or possibly bulkhead at the mast, and a little counter space. > >> Open bin stowage for duffles. > >>>>>> Tod > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>> From: montgomery_boats-bounces(a)mailman.xmission.com > >>>>>>> [mailto:montgomery_boats-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf > >>>>>>> Of Stan Susman > >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 5:53 PM > >>>>>>> To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: M_Boats: (no subject) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hey jm, what about a bigger boat? I'm too damn fat for a smaller > >>>>>>> one > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ________________________________ > >>>>>>> From: jerry montgomery<jerry(a)jerrymontgomery.org> > >>>>>>> To: montgomery forum<montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> > >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 1:04 PM > >>>>>>> Subject: M_Boats: (no subject) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi- Almost three years ago I asked the members of the M list for > >>>>>>> advice and opinions on ideas that we had regarding a new project > >>>>>>> that eventually became the Sage 17. We gave great consideration > >> to > >>>>>>> your opinions and ideas and there is absolutely no doubt that its > >>>>>>> a better boat because of you. The checks are in the mail! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Were starting to get serious about a smaller version of the Sage, > >>>>>>> and Id like to ask you for your help again. What we have in mind > >>>>>>> is a simple, three-stay rig, maybe even a cat rig, and possibly a > >>>>>>> dagger keel with a bulb in order to make it sit lower on the > >>>>>>> trailer and be beachable. We dont want purely water ballast > >>>>>>> because of the performance limitations, but a combo of water and > >> a > >>>>>>> lead slug on the end of the daggerboard might be worth > >> considering > >>>>>>> in order to hold down trailering weight. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We might be able to squeeze in a couple of low places to sit, by > >>>>>>> dropping the aft end of the interior down a few inches and for > >>>>>>> sleeping, fill in with thicker foam cushions. There would be > >>>>>>> storage under the settees, but not as much as otherwise. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Id also like to hear your comments on the carbon deck like on the > >> 17. > >>>>>>> There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that it is one of the > >>>>>>> secrets of the S 17s performance, kind of like free horsepower > >>>>>>> except that it isnt really free in that it will make the boat > >> cost > >>>>>>> at least a thousand dollars more. (After that it's free)! In your > >>>>>>> mind, is it worth the extra money? In the early 70s Montgomery > >>>>>>> Marine, in the Montgomery 17 was the first American builder of > >>>>>>> production boats to use end-grain balsa in the deck. (C&C Yachts, > >>>>>>> in Canada, was the first, I believe) Now, pretty much all but the > >>>>>>> cheepie builders use it. I think theres a good chance that carbon > >> will do the same thing. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> jerry > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. > >>>>>>> We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. > >>>>>>> SPAMfighter has removed 6308 of my spam emails to date. > >>>>>>> Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The Professional version does not have this message > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > > >

2 1

Harken windward sheeting traveler
by Bill Wickett 18 Mar '12

18 Mar '12

Rick, I am doing the same. I believe that the track spec uses #10 screws (5mm) not #12 for mounting. I am away today so can't look at the actual card with the track. Here is the PDF from the Harken site http://www.harken.com/pdf/4972.pdf Which track are you using? The Harken Low Beam 22mm CB track (captive ball track) is available with 4" hole centers (same as the OEM hole spacing) but only in a much longer length (6 feet) that needs cutting down. Harken #373.6. List $93.60 22mm Low Beam CB track is also available with 100mm hole spacing (3.93") in a 600mm length (23.6"). Harken #2720.600 List $34.40. This is the track I have. Not installed yet, boat is still under cover, but I expect to fill all holes and drill and pot with epoxy on new slightly different ( by .070")centers. Will have to cut a slight amount from each end to fit the end caps. These tracks will fit the windward sheeting cars 2744 / 2745 / 2746. I have the 2744 car. Looking forward to using it. Good luck Bill Wickett Makin' Time M17 #622 On 3/14/12, Rick Davies <jdavies104(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I am installing a Harken windward sheeting traveler and track, and found > that the Harken track mounts with #12 bolts, which look to be about half > the diameter of the bolts for the OEM track. Since others have installed > this track, I suppose that the bolt size is OK, but I wanted to ask advice > as to whether I can use the old holes without filling them in and drilling > a smaller size hole. Bob Eeg said that the old holes (which look fine) > could be used as is, but that was assuming re-using the original bolts. > Anybody have any ideas about what I should do? > > Thanks in advance, knowing that help will be on the way, > > Rick > M17 #633 > Lynne L >

4 11

Re: M_Boats: montgomery_boats Digest, Vol 109, Issue 12
by Steve Varley 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

> > Kind of but more like cutting around the keel and pushing it up inside the > hull so the hull becomes pretty flat suitable for beaching. Then inside > you could surround the keel with heavy storage and then have your cabin > floor on top of the keel. > Then add the keel height...6 or 8" to the hull sides. Does that increase > displacement? It would be the same "footprint" as the existing 15. Being > able to haul out on a beach would be a big plus. > The other big change I'd heartily endorse would be usable sitting/reading room inside. Thanks for listening! Steve > > "I guess you mean to add volume in the hull by bringing it down on the > centerline to the level of the fixed part of the keel? That would work but > I can't see an advantage unless you wanted to raise the displacement of the > hull (and ballast). > > jerry" >

1 0

Re: M_Boats: suggestions for new Sage 15 ish
by SALGLESSER＠aol.com 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

Hi Smiley, Thanx for the input. Missed you at Havasu. Maybe next year? Agree on the trailer. I'm not opposed to a rotating mast. Don't know where Jerry is at? Jerry can speak with Goeff, I can speak with Dick Newick. Internal halyards? Jerry's been thinking about this daggerboard question for more than a year. He's been focused on beachable. low water trailer launching and light weight towing. There are some issues to solve. He's still thinking. On the open transom; How will an open transom affect the ladder and outboard bracket? A 15 footer is not very wide at the transom. Interior is tricky, but as you mentioned, Jerry has some ideas about convertible space. We do need sitting headroom without having an overly tall deckhouse. 15 owners are often single-handing. While you mainly day sail, a place to comfortably tuck in for the night is important to many in the pocket cruiser genre. I'm guessing that Jerry's customers will prefer a lapstrake hull (I know I do). I think they're stronger, stiffer, dryer and track better. but to my knowledge there are no legal patents or trademarks on lapstrake hulls. Can't say much on price at this time as it depends on mfg costs. I can say we'll use top gear materials and hardware and high quality fabrication. I don't know current costs for competitive 15 footers or what's included in the base price and what's extra? While we'll pay attention to costs, a Sage 15 will probably be more expensive than the current 15' competition. sal '86 M15 "Justus" #361 In a message dated 3/17/2012 7:59:20 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, magoo252(a)comcast.net writes: Jerry/Sal/Dave, Replacing a Legend is difficult and the Monty 15 which was designed by none other than Jerry Montgomery won't be any easier. May I suggest that since the boat will be a trailerable sailboat that you guys START with a NEW lower to the ground trailer BUT utilize the same 15 inch or 16 inch wheels we have all come to love. The trailer should obviously cradle the hull BUT for us east coasters be able to launch the new design in very shallow water. Get Pacific involved in the design early. Now I'd also call your pal Geoff Prindle and talk to him about rotating 16 foot beach cat rigs. Also I like the idea of a water balasted bulb keel. Dagger boards have their inherent issues and this new design should be about "KISS". Lastly how about an open transom design, allows easy access to the rear and simplicity in the water access and all. As far as the interior how about a convertible design where if you want bunks for sleeping that can be added but I LIKE SPACE since most of my sailing on a 15 footer is day sailing and bunks take up storage space. I am sure you will do your patented trademark lapstrake hull which I have no issues with but at the end of the day if the price point is far off your Gold Standard Monty 15 current price you will end up with a nice design and folks will still covet a Monty 15 used or new. Best of luck as I will follow these developments with a open mind. I like my Monty 15 A LOT and it will take A LOT to pry me away from her. I am sure you know this marketing factoid already. Another Wrinkle Monty 15 #616 berthed here in the Nation's Capitol and trailer sailed off shallow ramps and must check my tide tables too many times!! Smiley magoo252(a)comcast.net

1 0

Re: M_Boats: montgomery_boats Digest, Vol 109, Issue 11
by Steve Varley 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

I've been thinking about this design for a while and it may fit into your plans too. I'm not sure how to describe it. If the hull bottom met at the bottom of the lead keel you would have a beachable hull instead of the keel sticking down. You could utilize the space surrounding the lead keel for storage, water etc. Stick with the swing keel, no daggerboard. I thought of building this in a 17 to 18' open boat and may still. But why wouldn't it work in a 15'? We're in San Carlos with our M15. Thanks for the good time! Steve Varley

2 1

M15 RiggingQuestion
by Jeffrey Johnston 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

Having just brought home my "new to me" M15, I have not yet rigged her (even in the driveway as a trial, learning run). I notice that my side stays and forestay terminate with no turnbuckles. Instead, there are some sort of U shaped, approx. 4" long stainless jaw type fittings with many clevis pin holes (adjustability?). Is this the norm? Plenty of stay tensioning ability with these? I've never had a boat so rigged. All of my previous sailboat's stays terminated with turnbuckles for adjustment. Of course, they ran from 26' to 42' in length. Perhaps this size boat, with much lighter standing rigging, works just fine this way? Sorry to bother all with such mundane questions; just never seen this before. Thanks for your patience with such a "newb" Monty owner! *Jeff+* Molōn labe!

3 2

Re: M_Boats: M15 RiggingQuestion
by W David Scobie 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

jeff: as stated by the Trometers, what you describe is how jerry designed and rigged the M15. installing turnbuckles are added complication and weight and are not necessary. the M15 standing rigging isn't set 'tight'. is only adjusted to be snug, not loose. i too went from larger boats to the M15 and how the rig is set is different. you don't want the forestay nor shrouds to be 'G string tight'. i really doubt if you even need to tune the rig. it is likely set fine. concerned about the strength? look at this - http://youtu.be/sO4vrWxDnRI :: Dave Scobie :: former M15 owner - www.freewebs.com/m15-named-scred :: Sage Marine --- On Sat, 3/17/12, Jeffrey Johnston <frjeff(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Having just brought home my "new to > me" M15, I have not yet rigged her > (even in the driveway as a trial, learning run). > > I notice that my side stays and forestay terminate with no > turnbuckles. > Instead, there are some sort of U shaped, approx. 4" long > stainless jaw > type fittings with many clevis pin holes (adjustability?). > > Is this the norm? Plenty of stay tensioning ability with > these? > > I've never had a boat so rigged. All of my previous > sailboat's stays > terminated with turnbuckles for adjustment. Of course, they > ran from 26' to > 42' in length. Perhaps this size boat, with much lighter > standing rigging, > works just fine this way? > > Sorry to bother all with such mundane questions; just never > seen this > before. > > Thanks for your patience with such a "newb" Monty owner! > > *Jeff+* > Molōn labe! >

1 0

suggestions for new Sage 15 ish
by Karen and Smiley 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

Jerry/Sal/Dave, Replacing a Legend is difficult and the Monty 15 which was designed by none other than Jerry Montgomery won't be any easier. May I suggest that since the boat will be a trailerable sailboat that you guys START with a NEW lower to the ground trailer BUT utilize the same 15 inch or 16 inch wheels we have all come to love. The trailer should obviously cradle the hull BUT for us east coasters be able to launch the new design in very shallow water. Get Pacific involved in the design early. Now I'd also call your pal Geoff Prindle and talk to him about rotating 16 foot beach cat rigs. Also I like the idea of a water balasted bulb keel. Dagger boards have their inherent issues and this new design should be about "KISS". Lastly how about an open transom design, allows easy access to the rear and simplicity in the water access and all. As far as the interior how about a convertible design where if you want bunks for sleeping that can be added but I LIKE SPACE since most of my sailing on a 15 footer is day sailing and bunks take up storage space. I am sure you will do your patented trademark lapstrake hull which I have no issues with but at the end of the day if the price point is far off your Gold Standard Monty 15 current price you will end up with a nice design and folks will still covet a Monty 15 used or new. Best of luck as I will follow these developments with a open mind. I like my Monty 15 A LOT and it will take A LOT to pry me away from her. I am sure you know this marketing factoid already. Another Wrinkle Monty 15 #616 berthed here in the Nation's Capitol and trailer sailed off shallow ramps and must check my tide tables too many times!! Smiley magoo252(a)comcast.net

1 0

(no subject)
by jerry montgomery 17 Mar '12

17 Mar '12

interesting that people are talking about a larger boat, but I really don;'t think it's in the cards because of economic reasons. You can almost price boats by the cube of the length, so if a 17 costs 25K, a 21 would have to sell for a whopping 46K for the manufacture to stay in business. There are too many old 20's and 22's on the market for 10K for this to work in the near future. Possibly a 19, which would only be a 17 with more elbowroom, but you would also need a mast putter-upper, a bigger truck, a stronger crew, a 4K suit of sails, etc etc. Even so, I'm putting your comments in a folder for long-term safe keeping! jerry -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 6309 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

2 1