December 2013 - montgomery_boats - mailman.xmission.com

Re: M_Boats: Downhaul system
by GILASAILR＠aol.com 11 Dec '13

11 Dec '13

In a message dated 12/6/2013 3:17:58 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, wdscobie(a)yahoo.com writes: Chris (and others reading): to get an idea for what the sliding gooseneck fitting looks like follow this link - https://www.dwyermast.com/itemdetails.asp?itemID=30 look at item #8, the slide. (the boom side of the gooseneck is close, though not 100% the same as the boats built by Jerry.) my M15, and my M17 had the sailfeed slot's modified by prior owners just a few inches above the mast. a PITA for loading the sail and boom, in additon makes it impossible to use a bolt rope luff (can't reef) and can be problematic for reefing with slugs. this must have become a popular modification at some point as as i've purchased to M-boats that have the same change. to convert my M17 i can't re-bend where the original slot was located as the alum will break. i plan to cut out the slot location. i like the fixed gooseneck for a couple of reasons - #1 is the boom doesn't slam down onto the cabintop when lowing the sail (to take down or when reefing). i've found that using a sail stop works most of the time .. but seems to come loose and then doesn't stop the boom. #2 using a cunningham to control the main's luff tension is very easy and does not require a huge amount of leverage. to control the luff with a moving gooseneck requires a LOT of effort and, because of line stretch, requires repeated adjustment as the wind increases (that is increasingly dif ficult to do as the wind speed increases). :: Dave Scobie :: former M15 owner - www.freewebs.com/m15-named-scred :: M17 #375 SWEET PEA - www.m17-375.webs.com -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 12/6/13, Chris Smith <chris.r.smith(a)gmail.com> wrote: This is a quite timely conversation for me, as I've recently replaced the mast and boom on my M15. My old mast had the boom fixed, but the new mast has the sailfeed opening very low. I was considering using a floating boom so I don't have to cut another, higher opening for the sail above a fixed boom. David, you mention that you like the fixed boom more. Why is that? Clearly, it's worth it to you to go fixed boom... Daniel, it seems like you like your floating boom. Why? Also, does anyone have a picture of a floating boom gooseneck on their M15? It'd be great to see what one looks like. Thus far I've been envisioning a slug attached to 1/2 of the gooseneck that would ride up and down the sail slot. The stop is something I overlooked! Thanks to all for any pro/con discussion on fixed vs floating boom. I've done some reading on it and it seems to be a matter of preference... Really, I just need to make a decision on whether or not to cut a new hole in the mast to feed the sail. Good stuff! Thanks all! Chris M15 Persephone

4 4

Re: M_Boats: Newbie's first question
by edarts93＠earthlink.net 09 Dec '13

09 Dec '13

I say it's the singer, not the song. Sure, Larry keeps Corndog well tuned but he also has good instincts and makes very good decisions on the water. Any M17 can be set up properly but someone still has to sail her. Let's give credit where its due. Jerry built a good boat but Larry's a great sailor. Mark Dvorscak (who has personally spent much time chasing Larry) -----Original Message----- >From: Larry Yake <larryyake(a)gmail.com> >Sent: Dec 8, 2013 9:48 AM >To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> >Subject: Re: M_Boats: Newbie's first question > >Sure. I pull waterskiers all the time. Getting her up on the hydrofoils >is the most fun, though. :-) >Jerry, you'll be getting orders for replicas if this keeps up. > > >On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Thomas Buzzi <thomaspbuzzi(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Gee, will it do a "wheeelie" under full throttle?? >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 10:36 AM, jerry montgomery < >> jerry(a)jerrymontgomery.org >> > wrote: >> >> > Actually, Larry paid me extra to make his boat. It's all made with >> Kevlar, >> > and if you count the hidden hydrogen tanks it only weighs 147 lbs! >> > >> > jerry >> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Yake" <larryyake(a)gmail.com> >> > To: "For and about Montgomery Sailboats" <montgomery_boats@mailman. >> > xmission.com> >> > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 9:37 PM >> > Subject: Re: M_Boats: Newbie's first question >> > >> > >> > Ha! No, CornDog's engine doesn't drag in any conditions so moving it >> onto >> >> a >> >> lowering bracket won't gain me any speed. Tried that once, actually, and >> >> didn't like it at all. Messed up the boat's balance. Probably slowed me >> >> down. Maybe you guys with the brackets ought to make a cutout in the >> >> transom...... ;-) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Tom Smith <openboatt(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> I don't remember the cutout-mounted OB slowing Larry down any, but >> heaven >> >>> forbid he does a mod that makes him even faster than he already is. >> Don't >> >>> pay any attention to Ian's post, Larry. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> t _/\_ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Stanley Wheatley < >> swwheatley(a)comcast.net >> >>> >wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > Ended up getting a good deal on a used Mercury (made by Tohatsu) 5 hp >> >>> > two-stroke long shaft. It fits in the cutout pretty well so I've > >> >>> removed >> >>> > the scissor mount and put that on Craigslist. Many more questions to >> >>> come. >> >>> > >> >>> > -----Original Message----- From: Ian Black >> >>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 9:20 PM >> >>> > To: montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com >> >>> > Subject: Re: M_Boats: Newbie's first question >> >>> > >> >>> > Hi All, >> >>> > Have to disagree with Larry on this one. I say use the attached >> motor >> >>> > mount. The Seaweeble (1982 model) had the factory fixed motor mount >> >>> > which sat at approximately the same height as the older cut out >> mounts. >> >>> > My long shaft Honda and newer long shaft Yamaha both dragged in the >> >>> > water when the port side was to leeward with more than two people in >> > >> >>> the >> >>> > boat (or one person and one of my more portly buddies). I removed >> the >> >>> > old fixed mount, replaced it with a scissor type mount. Voila! No >> more >> >>> > dragging in the drink!. I'm sure it added a tenth of a knot to the >> >>> > Seaweeble's already blinding speed. Thank goodness, Mark (M-23 Faith) >> >>> > taught me how to reef. >> >>> > Ian >> >>> > M-17 The mighty"Seaweeble" >> >>> > >> >>> > On 11/12/2013 1:28 PM, Larry Yake wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> By all means, use the cutout in the transom. The boat is balanced >> >> >>> better >> >>> >> with the motor there rather than hanging off the back and it is much >> >>> more >> >>> >> convenient to control. What you will loose is the ability to turn >> the >> >>> >> motor >> >>> >> very far. The cutout is rather narrow and doesn't allow much room to >> >>> swing >> >>> >> with todays wider four stroke engines. No problem though as the boat >> >>> >> maneuvers well with just the rudder for steering. The long shaft >> motor >> >>> >> will >> >>> >> work fine. Don't even think about the short shaft. Also, you will >> want >> >>> to >> >>> >> mount the motor as far away from the rudder blade as you can within >> >>> >> the >> >>> >> cutout to provide as much clearance from the prop as you can. As I >> >>> recall, >> >>> >> the Tohatsu/Nissan engine has the control arm offset to the port >> side >> >>> >> which >> >>> >> will not allow you to move the engine very far to the side. That's >> >>> why >> I >> >>> >> went with the Suzuki. The control arm comes out from the center of >> the >> >>> >> engine allowing you to mount the motor farther from the rudder. >> >>> >> Larry >> >>> >> 1976 M17 CornDog >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:07 PM, <swwheatley(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >> My new-to-me M17 did not come with a motor. It did, however, come >> >> >> >>> with >> >>> a >> >>> >>> big honking scissor-type motor mount hanging off the transom. >> Because >> >>> it >> >>> >>> is >> >>> >>> a 1976, it also has the transom cut-out motor mount. The motor of >> my >> >>> >>> dreams >> >>> >>> is the Tohatsu/Nissan 4 stroke 4hp. It is available in short (15") >> >>> >>> and >> >>> >>> long >> >>> >>> (20") shaft. My question is, will the long shaft work reasonably >> well >> >>> if >> >>> >>> it >> >>> >>> is mounted in the transom cut-out, or should I plan on using the >> >>> scissor >> >>> >>> mount either way? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> I would also be interested to hear whether the Tohatsu/Nissan 6hp >> >>> >>> "Sailpro" (25" shaft) works well with the transom cut-out. There >> are >> >>> >>> other >> >>> >>> reasons why I probably would not buy one of those but, if meant >>> >> >>> getting >> >>> >>> rid >> >>> >>> of the scissor mount, I would at least give it some thought. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Thanks >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. >> > SPAMfighter has removed 9674 of my spam emails to date. >> > Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len >> > >> > Do you have a slow PC? Try a Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/ >> > SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen >> > >> > >> > >> > >>

2 1

Newbie's first question
by swwheatley＠comcast.net 09 Dec '13

09 Dec '13

My new-to-me M17 did not come with a motor. It did, however, come with a big honking scissor-type motor mount hanging off the transom. Because it is a 1976, it also has the transom cut-out motor mount. The motor of my dreams is the Tohatsu/Nissan 4 stroke 4hp. It is available in short (15") and long (20") shaft. My question is, will the long shaft work reasonably well if it is mounted in the transom cut-out, or should I plan on using the scissor mount either way? I would also be interested to hear whether the Tohatsu/Nissan 6hp "Sailpro" (25" shaft) works well with the transom cut-out. There are other reasons why I probably would not buy one of those but, if meant getting rid of the scissor mount, I would at least give it some thought. Thanks

8 13

Re: M_Boats: Newbie's first question
by bownez＠juno.com 08 Dec '13

08 Dec '13

OK Larry, Time to tell everyone about the Saildrive you have hidden in your hull.... Bones ____________________________________________________________ Odd Carb-Hormone Trick 1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/52a47ac3706807ac321a9st02vuc

1 0

Downhaul system
by Daniel Rich 07 Dec '13

07 Dec '13

Montypals: I am doing some re-rigging of M15 Kestrel. Just received my sails from JudyB and Hyde a few weeks ago. Sadly, the jib is too big! So, it is being remade. Just one of those things. In any event, I am going to set up a 3-1 outhaul per a previous photo supplied by one of you guys. Looks good. But I am grappling with the best way to set up a better downhaul. My current setup is a 2-1 going only through the cunningham. Basically there is an eyestrap on one side of the mast, and the line goes from there up through the cringle, and then down to a jam cleat. Not a very nice setup, and the thing is too high anyway so the purchase is not good. I want to get perhaps 4-1, but don’t want to lead it aft. I am just having a hard time visualizing the thing. A cascading system would work I think, but I just have a hard time understanding the geometry. Furthermore, easy rigging and derigging is a must. I want to use the downhaul instead, since there is a ring on my floating gooseneck for that purpose, and that should work as well or better than the cunningham. I will mount much lower on the mast. Any ideas here?? -- Daniel Rich M15 #208 "Kestrel"

5 7

Re: M_Boats: Downhaul system Redux
by GILASAILR＠aol.com 06 Dec '13

06 Dec '13

OOOOPs Dave's comment's #1 & 2 are spot on in my experience - I changed my gooseneck to fixed when I replaced the rig. When I adjust the mainsail luff tension a 3:1 rig is used attached to a pennant with a reef or cunningham hook. It is much harder to adjust luff tension with a floating gooseneck as the whole boom needs to move up or down when adjusted - this is restricted by vang and mainshheet tension - the vang is forcing the boom forward into the sail slot and the gooseneck binds -(see early model 17 masts at sail slot and surrounding areas - usually 'chewed up' at sail slot edges) If the gooseneck is fixed, you are able to adjust the luff tension independently of the boom position - boom won't fall on deck when reefing (darn it!!!) and if the cunningham is rigged long enough the hook may serve as the forward reef. Do you really want the boom falling to the deck when reefing in a bit of a hurry - NO. Grab cunni - hook - into reef cringle and boom stays where it belongs and the adjustment is waiting for you. People commonly say - 'It is easier to slide the boom out of the mast to stow for trailering.' - yes it is - easier than removing one clevis pin - I take the secure position of the boom in favor of removing ONE split ring and pin. A downhaul is there to secure the gooseneck - to fix it's upward movement/location. It is an inefficient means of tensioning the mainsail luff. (PS when I was in the 'Sailboat biz' I sold HUNDREDs of Davis sail stops - they will fail at keeping your boom from moving UP/DOWN in the track unless you crank them down with a pliers - they will then corrode and fail when you are reefing in a squall - they also like Davy Jones' Locker. Wanna buy another one?? No.) If you want a floating or sliding gooseneck install a screw at the lower range of travel then use a Cunningham or simple downhaul rig. Last time my sailmaker sent me a new mainsail I had to learn how to rig my "floating tack" MORE confusion (not really) just different. I have actually seen (on a customer's boat at the time) - a sliding gooseneck slide up and OUT of the track with the sail attached when sailing - some kind of CF and planetary alignment I am sure - but it did happen - that was an ugly beast to recover! Remember - Always wear eye protection - your mileage may vary - slow down to enjoy the ride and HAVE FUN! Sorry bout the DUMMY post previously and to include this one in same category. GO M-17t sail #354 'Wabi-Sabi' You KNOW you are PERSONALLY INVITED to the 2014 WICR/Potter Invitational _www.wrinkleboat.webs.com_ (http://www.wrinkleboat.webs.com) In a message dated 12/6/2013 3:30:09 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, GILASAILR(a)aol.com writes: In a message dated 12/6/2013 3:17:58 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, wdscobie(a)yahoo.com writes: Chris (and others reading): to get an idea for what the sliding gooseneck fitting looks like follow this link - https://www.dwyermast.com/itemdetails.asp?itemID=30 look at item #8, the slide. (the boom side of the gooseneck is close, though not 100% the same as the boats built by Jerry.) my M15, and my M17 had the sailfeed slot's modified by prior owners just a few inches above the mast. a PITA for loading the sail and boom, in additon makes it impossible to use a bolt rope luff (can't reef) and can be problematic for reefing with slugs. this must have become a popular modification at some point as as i've purchased to M-boats that have the same change. to convert my M17 i can't re-bend where the original slot was located as the alum will break. i plan to cut out the slot location. i like the fixed gooseneck for a couple of reasons - #1 is the boom doesn't slam down onto the cabintop when lowing the sail (to take down or when reefing). i've found that using a sail stop works most of the time .. but seems to come loose and then doesn't stop the boom. #2 using a cunningham to control the main's luff tension is very easy and does not require a huge amount of leverage. to control the luff with a moving gooseneck requires a LOT of effort and, because of line stretch, requires repeated adjustment as the wind increases (that is increasingly dif ficult to do as the wind speed increases). :: Dave Scobie :: former M15 owner - www.freewebs.com/m15-named-scred :: M17 #375 SWEET PEA - www.m17-375.webs.com -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 12/6/13, Chris Smith <chris.r.smith(a)gmail.com> wrote: This is a quite timely conversation for me, as I've recently replaced the mast and boom on my M15. My old mast had the boom fixed, but the new mast has the sailfeed opening very low. I was considering using a floating boom so I don't have to cut another, higher opening for the sail above a fixed boom. David, you mention that you like the fixed boom more. Why is that? Clearly, it's worth it to you to go fixed boom... Daniel, it seems like you like your floating boom. Why? Also, does anyone have a picture of a floating boom gooseneck on their M15? It'd be great to see what one looks like. Thus far I've been envisioning a slug attached to 1/2 of the gooseneck that would ride up and down the sail slot. The stop is something I overlooked! Thanks to all for any pro/con discussion on fixed vs floating boom. I've done some reading on it and it seems to be a matter of preference... Really, I just need to make a decision on whether or not to cut a new hole in the mast to feed the sail. Good stuff! Thanks all! Chris M15 Persephone

1 0

Re: M_Boats: P-15 vs M-15 vs CP-16
by GILASAILR＠aol.com 05 Dec '13

05 Dec '13

Force 5 is not a problem in the M-15 as Dave said. Bernard was rocking in 20 solid with gusts to 30 some short cruddy chop at 1.5 to 2 foot steep and close. I was sailing right next to him in my 17t full main and 140 blade Stan was sailing the 17s with full main and 135. Everybody was haulin the mail! (even Dave! {;>) ) All three of the boats - M-17, M-15 and Sage are VERY capable in those conditions and not taxed or uncomfortable. GO In a message dated 12/4/2013 3:37:47 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, wdscobie(a)yahoo.com writes: step waves are difficult to go to weather in ... especially when they are 1/2 the length of the boat! :: Dave Scobie -------------------------------------------- On Wed, 12/4/13, casioqv(a)usermail.com <casioqv(a)usermail.com> wrote: I suspect the person who told me that was sailing offshore in force 5 winds, so probably was trying to beat into 9+ foot waves! Tyler ----- Original Message ----- From: "W David Scobie" <wdscobie(a)yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 2:19:31 PM 'but I've heard the M15 doesn't really go to windward in over 20 knots.' don't say this to Sea Sprite! at Lake Pleasant in Jan '13, he was running a full main and working jib had no problem going around the marks in over 20kts. (yes, Bernard was hiked out on the cockpit combing.) the big boats at the regatta that had wind speed indicators were reporting winds at 28kts. the M15 will not go well to weather unless you have both main and jib flying. if in a gust the captain lets the M15's main luff to much, or let it loose, the boat will not do well (the main sheet is the backstay, loose main sheet the jib shape goes to hell). for a cruiser a double reefed main and a 60% (or so) storm jib the M15 will scoot right along, to weather, in over 20kts. :: Dave Scobie :: former M15 owner - www.freewebs.com/m15-named-scred :: M17 #375 SWEET PEA - www.m17-375.webs.com -------------------------------------------- On Wed, 12/4/13, casioqv(a)usermail.com <casioqv(a)usermail.com> wrote: GILASAILR, I think some of it comes from just looking at raw specifications, from people that haven't sailed the boats. For example, Steve Henkel's book "The Sailor's Book of Small Cruising Sailboats" says that the M15 points worse than other sailboats it's size due to reduced maximum draft. But I think this is ignoring that it's really a large low aspect ratio keel, much larger in surface area than the deeper but shorter centerboard on most other boats this size. Still, I expect keel depth does make a big difference. Serge Testa's book "500 Days: Around the World on a 12 Foot Yacht" claims that his 12 foot boat with a very deep bulb keel was able to point to windward in anything under 70 knots, and could hold position in over 70 knots! I can't wait to try for myself in SF Bay, but I've heard the M15 doesn't really go to windward in over 20 knots. That might have been on boats that didn't have good heavy weather sails? Tyler M15 ----- Original Message ----- From: GILASAILR(a)aol.com To: "montgomery boats" <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2013 7:55:29 PM Subject: Re: M_Boats: P-15 vs M-15 vs CP-16 Tyler - it appears you waded through the conflicting info. {;>) " Dude - my 63 Simca handles like it's on rails, goes 135 MPH and gets 20 MPG - it is the coolest" By nature we usually 'defend' our choices /purchases/investments as being good and 'right' - sometimes I actually luck out. GO In a message dated 12/3/2013 6:21:36 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, casioqv(a)usermail.com writes: I don't have enough experience to help with the review, but I can't wait to read it! In deciding which small trailer sailor to buy, I found extremely conflicting information on the relative windward performance of these boats. Perhaps it would be possible to find or generate some objective data on this? Thanks, Tyler M15

1 0

Re: M_Boats: P-15 vs M-15 vs CP-16
by GILASAILR＠aol.com 04 Dec '13

04 Dec '13

Tyler - it appears you waded through the conflicting info. {;>) " Dude - my 63 Simca handles like it's on rails, goes 135 MPH and gets 20 MPG - it is the coolest" By nature we usually 'defend' our choices /purchases/investments as being good and 'right' - sometimes I actually luck out. GO In a message dated 12/3/2013 6:21:36 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, casioqv(a)usermail.com writes: I don't have enough experience to help with the review, but I can't wait to read it! In deciding which small trailer sailor to buy, I found extremely conflicting information on the relative windward performance of these boats. Perhaps it would be possible to find or generate some objective data on this? Thanks, Tyler M15 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Small Craft Advisor" <smallcraftadvisor(a)earthlink.net> To: "montgomery boats" <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2013 9:11:52 AM Subject: M_Boats: P-15 vs M-15 vs CP-16 Hi Folks, We're taking an unusual tack with our next feature-length boat review— we're going to do a comparison of the Potter 15, Montgomery 15, and Com-Pac 16. We're not looking to bash any of these boats, we just want help potential used-boat buyers understand the relative pros and cons. As always we'd like to include feedback from owner-sailors. If you've owned or regularly sailed any TWO (or all three) of these boats and would be interested in participating (and possibly being quoted), please send us an e-mail at: smallcraftadvisor(a)earthlink.net and we'll return our survey questions. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Joshua Colvin Small Craft Advisor PO Box 1343 Port Townsend, WA 98368 www.smallcraftadvisor.com PH 800-979-1930 PH 360-379-1930

3 4

Re: M_Boats: Monty 17, #24
by bownez＠juno.com 04 Dec '13

04 Dec '13

Tom, My 1976 M17 is yellow, and so is Larry Yakes....... Welcome to the club.. you rock. Bones ____________________________________________________________ Ready for Hillary? Add your name: We're ready for Hillary when she's ready to run. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/529e7f3d38f1c7f3d5aecst03vuc

4 7

Re: M_Boats: Monty 17, #24
by bownez＠juno.com 04 Dec '13

04 Dec '13

Hi Tom, That is a good question for Jerry. There does seen to be a number of yellow hulled M17's from the 1976 early era. I have seen several in Minnesota. Sailboats Inc. was a dealer of the Montgomery line here back then, and sold many. Mine is a 1976 hull #92, with 3 gudgeons for the rudder. It is a soft, faded looking yellow. The later yellow models seem a much brighter yellow, almost an OSHA bright. Jerry must have really been cranking out boats then, Larry's1976 M17 (which was at Havasu last year) is hull #200. Mine could benefit from some gelcoat polishing, but, I'd rather be on the water with her. I'll try to attach a pic. It was taken in the Apostle Is. on Superior last July. Later gang. Bones ____________________________________________________________ Do THIS before eating carbs (every time) 1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/529f3c7e2a60e3c7d372ast03vuc

2 1