Re: M_Boats: centerboard
I thought the new M-17 CB's were fiberglass, light enough to lift with a pendant. True or false? If true, unless more ballast was added to compensate for the FG CB, it shouldn't be a factor. Steve Tyree, P-15 (currently reconditioning my ity bity Potter CB :) In a message dated 2/21/2004 11:14:17 AM Central Standard Time, Tom.Smith@itron.com writes: My immediate concern about a starboard cb (I think there are other problems as well...) is you are losing 200 plus pounds of ballast. It doesn't seem like much, but it has to be nearly 30 percent of the M17's low weight. I'd be more interested in this option for the M15, who's cb weight is much less a factor in righting. t (another mathematically challenged liberal arts major) Tom Smith & Jane Van Winkle
From Jerry Montgomery's history of the M17, on the MSOG site:
"In 1981 we retooled the 17, mostly because the molds had had several hundred boats made form them and were getting worn out, but incorporated several minor changes, like improving the windows, cockpit drainage, and the hull/deck joint, and changing the toe rails, forward hatch details, etc. In about '84 we changed from extruded aluminum toe rails to those of teak, mostly because of changing market trends. In 1987 we made a centerboard change; from cast iron to fiberglass with a lead core. The new centerboards were thicker in section but smaller in profile, and I can't tell the difference between the two types in sailing them. This change was made in response to death threats and other complaints resulting from the rusting problem common to cast iron. The new centerboards are no better, but they don't rust. The older ones are probably more reliable, being cast iron, but we've had no problems with the new after 6 years. At the same time, we changed from steel to lead ballast, and increased the total ballast weight from 550 to 600 lbs." So it would seem that Jerry switched to a much lighter board, because the cast-iron board requires a winch to raise while the new board does not, but he added only 50 lbs ballast. I'd be curious to know what an '87-present M17 weighs compared to an '81-'86, because I'm sure Jerry will confirm that the newer boats are as stiff and seaworthy as the old . . . ----- Original Message ----- From: <IDCLLC@aol.com> To: <montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 9:08 AM Subject: centerboard I thought the new M-17 CB's were fiberglass, light enough to lift with a pendant. True or false? If true, unless more ballast was added to compensate for the FG CB, it shouldn't be a factor. Steve Tyree, P-15 (currently reconditioning my ity bity Potter CB :) --------------- In a message dated 2/21/2004 11:14:17 AM Central Standard Time, Tom.Smith@itron.com writes: My immediate concern about a starboard cb (I think there are other problems as well...) is you are losing 200 plus pounds of ballast. It doesn't seem like much, but it has to be nearly 30 percent of the M17's low weight. I'd be more interested in this option for the M15, who's cb weight is much less a factor in righting. t (another mathematically challenged liberal arts major) Tom Smith & Jane Van Winkle
participants (2)
-
Honshells -
IDCLLC＠aol.com