from a puget sound and san juan island perspective go with the TALL RIG. what i don't know from your description, jerry, is how stiff you have designed the boat. without seeing the hull, knowing ballast, and depth of keel/centerboard it is difficult to know how the boat will react ... guess this is why you conduct sea trials. having the larger cabin for folks to get out of the weather means airflow becomes more important. as a well ventilated cabin is most important when docked, or at anchor, a forward hatch seems, IMO, better than portlights opening on the cabin sides. if a forward hatch is picked choose one that can open both directions. for aesthetics it is hard to say what will look OK - something like the M23s cabin profile or the 'streamlined' M15/17? guess that will need to be shared in drawings, CAD renderings and/or a model. to be honest foredeck work isn't fun on the 15 or the 17. during the MSOG san juan cruise in june i was in a situation where i didn't want to do a headsail change because of the sea condition. how about making roller reefing standard for the headsail? dave scobie M17 #375 SWEET PEA. visit SWEET PEA's www-site - http://www.m17-375.webs.com --- On Thu, 8/6/09, jerry <jerry@jerrymontgomery.org> wrote: More market research! . . . Questions: The cabin, which fits in with the forward hatch. I have drawn the boat with a "Montgomery style" house similar to the existing 15 and 17. A problem is that there is not room for a "real" forward hatch unless we go to a trunk house type of cabin , with a traditional, more vertical forward panel. This will give us another 4 or 6" of cabin deck space in front of the mast, enough for a fwd hatch, without encroaching on the foredeck. How do you feel about this? Is the forward hatch worth a Hess style house? The only disadvantage of a trunk house is a bit more windage sailing upwind, which is drag. I can live with it and I wonder if some might prefer it. It also has a bit more headroom sitting on the head. Windows. What percentage of you would like the option of opening ports? All the ones I've seen on the market ( and I really haven't paid much attention for years) are pretty traditional and would go well with a trunk house. If we picked a good opening window we would probably design a non-opening port to go with it as standard equipment. In any case we would need to use two windows per side to leave the middle part of the sides of the house uncut, for strength. Any thoughts on this? Personally I'd opt for no fwd hatch, and use a dorade vent which works for me because of where I sail, but I realize that most of you do not sail in CA and Mexico. Also, the slap slap of anchoring stern-to doesn't really bother me when I sleep. I just pretend it's Mom's heartbeat. This is a subtle thing but an ongoing discussion is just where do we put the line on stability versus speed? I have always preferred the tall rig 17 to the normal one because it has a touch more speed. Yes, it has to reef or downshift the jib a bit earlier, but so what? If you sail in an area where it blows 20 regularly I would expect you to feel differently, but how many of us do? I would rather have a spirited boat in the light stuff, but I realize this is just me. With most any fractional rig it works best to go to a smaller headsail before reefing the main, mostly for the sake of forestay tension, but it's not a big deal unless you want to win a race. You 15 owners- would you rather have a bit more ballast and not have the boat quite as lively in the light stuff, or is it about right? How about the 17? How often do you wish you had a tall rig? Gary O, who is as knowledgeable as I, blew the mast on his 17 and had worn out sails, and he replaced the rig with a tall rig. How many of you would do this if fSaced with the same situation? The 15 and the 17 have earned their reputations in three ways; they are well built, they are seaworthy, and they are remarkably fast for their lengths. I really expect to make the 16 as fast as a 17 because of up-to-date design and technology, but it must also be as stable and seaworthy. I have had the thought before that I'd take a 15 anywhere I would a 17, and the new boat needs to be included in this. Any comments? jerry