I am just right above Circus at 99. The reason I received today for the range was the large tolarances during the build, not crew weight and I was double-handed. So, what? A full measurement for a lot of $$ ? This is only hurting sailing.
I think the stability index number does not reflect the boat's stability at all. Maybe ISTIX needs to be looked at as a second screen.
At least there are many grass roots alternatives, i.e., HOOK, Queen's, LMSS and GLSS (solo/double) events on the lake. CYC needs to realize the Mac isn't the VOR.
The J/30 got a shout out on the front page of Sailing Anarchy as the example of a "proven offshore boat" being excluded from the Chi-Mac. They interviewed the Chief Measurer:
While I can respect the CYC decision, I wish it were different. I am optimistic that the BYC Committee will adopt a more flexible approach to boat selection for the Port Huron to Mackinac as thay have stated that they will review marginal boats individually considering structure and experience. This should reflect more favorably on the J30. We will see.
Though some here discourage posting on their mostly anonymous forum, there has been a fairly extensive thread on Sailing Anarchy over the past week on this issue. Several folks weighed in on the Rafiki team that was apparently planning to do the race next summer and whose crew is now looking for a ride.
The magic number is 103. You must have an ORR stability index >= 103. J/30s seem to range between 98.9 (Circus) and 102.8 (Falcon). I'm pretty sure the difference between the 2 is the quality of the malt beverages carried on each.
I'd wager none of the J/30s have been actually measured. Perhaps Rod or someone that knows could suggest class legal changes to a J/30 that would help improve it's SI enough to qualify.
So I'm wondering what kind of changes it would take to drag it over the hump; even if it was not class legal but temporary for offshore racing. A few lead bars in the bilge? Some autoinflating flotation fixed to the cabin top like some rescue rhibs have? :p
We should be proactive in this as an owners group as we may start to see this issue more and more often.
Rafiki amd Madcap will race the HOOK. The HOOK is a great event same dates as the mac, but a little shorter and w/o all the B/S, Madcap is going with my fiance as skipper as I have other obligations on a Mac boat.
I talked with several people Mac committee (incl. Ron White) and they are very supportive to help get the boats remeasured/accurate data and figure out what a J30 needs to qualify. May only need a full measurment, it is close to the 103 ORR si number.
Thanks for moving the Ron White interview to the Front Page I think it important to all J30 owners As to the SA site, there is some useful dialog there you just have to sort through it. I notice that the ORR listings of SI's has Falcon at 102.8. How much of a lead balast at the bottom of the keel(shoe)would improve each point of SI. For you engineering guys
think back at recent notes of fairing keels where lead is planed off the keel to achieve template exactness. We are probably looking at various keel weights depending on which day of the week the keel was cast. and it sounds like we are talking borderline amounts of keel weight that put our "Official" specs in trouble.
But what the measurer didn't mention is that the later cockpit configuration with a larger open area is also a negative in regard to water drainage. In a real hard rain ... i've been up to my ankles in water draining too slowly out of the cockpit drains. I'm thinking there are two measurements involved and the original configuration may make it.
I've always wondered if the early boats were perhaps closer to design spec because production wasn't as flat out so perhaps more attention was paid to details.
I don't like the idea of adding keel weight. We perform like a hot damn upwind already, and our weakness is wetted surface/weight down wind. The only logical solution is to start saving for a carbon mast, boom and pbo rigging!
On a fun note: One of my crew is building an i550 right now so he has been doing a lot of research into laying up carbon. After a Guinness or two last night our conversation turned to what in the J/30 we could turn into carbon fibre to get the speed up. Everything from buying a carbon fibre head to making all the storage hatch boards, but we decided best bang for the buck would be to lay up a new carbon engine cover complete with companionway stairs and a new nav table, Those things weigh a ton
Curious. I've never been measured that I know of. Hull 484. I have an old style interior 6 berths,and a new style cockpit, Teak and Holly floor. wonder how she would fare in the ORR SI#
