J/30 Class Association Forums J/30 Forum J/30 Class Association Business Board of Governors (BOG) Meeting

Where I sail (Raritan Bay NJ) we have a highly competitive mostly 30 foot (J29's, S-2 9.1's, J-30's) PHRF fleet without enough J-30's to race OD. The proposed changes will allow us to sail more competitively against those boats.

We race OD as much as possible, but generally we only get two events a year (NA's and Larchmont NOOD). The LIS J-30's are too spread out to consistently field a OD fleet.

The proposed changes are all good, even though I can't afford to take advantage of all of them right away.

Can we consider correcting the current rules that prohibit trigger release pole ends? That is how my current Kenyon pole came from the factory with trigger release ends...

The changes are OK by me. I don't race OD anymore and have already implemented the towable genoa cars. Our current rating method rewards dacron headsails so I'm happy to live in the past. The carbon pole sounds easier to handle. I'll start saving my quarters.

Echoing David's comment, I consider these rule proposals in terms of how they will enhance one-design racing or attract more participants to one-design races. Keeping equipment up-to-date serves that purpose; allowing sails or gear because PHRF handicappers fail to rate them does not.

I do have some sympathy for those consigned to PHRF, but I guess I'm just another Pollyanna. I thought complying with Class rules got you a one-design rating, while modifying your boat to make it 'more competitive' got your rating changed? Or were we planning to keep all this our little secret?

I can appreciate those who travel to Key West FL to race a J/30. If more J/30s showed up, we might sail in an OD class.
Can anyone tell me the benefit in terms of seconds per mile from the following:

(1) Optional Number 2
(2) Carbon Pole
(3) Kevlar #1

I think the issues are more price driven than speed. Over time, the optional #2 will save $$$, while carbon poles and Kevlar sails are within a couple $100 dollars in price compared to traditional solutions.

The proposed changes are good to attract some of the PHRF programs back towards OD. However, I am in agreement that we should take these changes a step at a time.

thor race beer can stuff in PHRF right now with OD number because of the longer pole..

Carbon poles seem to be rea expensive. More than a couple of hundred more than the usual i suspect.

Anyhow . Got a question ,, what are JIB horns ?
Thanks Thorsten

As far as Bob Rutsch's last comments (we missed the Beboppers in Barrington!), I think the PHRF penalties for modifications to the OD configuration are at the discretion of the regional PHRF associations. I recently had to retire my 1/2 oz chute and light #1 jib when I learned that I would take a 3 second hit for the use of non class sails (my local PHRF board of governors changed the rule on this to encourage full compliance w/ OD fleet regulations).

If the Class Association changes the class rules, I believe that it is the responsibility of individual PHRF fleet owners only to fill out the PHRF form as asked, and that the local PHRF association will re-rate only upon appeal from other boats. I know our local PHRF application does not reference pole material, saicloth weight or material, or the shape and size of any sail other than main, #1, and chute. I would thus expect no rating change from these proposed rule modifications unless a notable improvement in performance occurred as a result.

I think...

One more thought...

Those who race in solid OD fleets forget how hard it is to build an OD fleet in an area without one. I constantly hear sailors in my local PHRF fleet tell me that the 30 has a tough PHRF rating given the prevalence of a fairly light wind range, and many potential 30 owners opt for a 29 instead due to its better rating relative to performance.

Amd so, a catch 22... How do you encourage OD when the fleet restrictions on light air performance enhancements send buyers to other boats?

For improved market value and improved competitiveness in PHRF, as well as greater potential for more OD sailing, I say of the proposed changes, "Bring them on!".

The changes as they were discussed at the meeting
1) #1 sail cloth. the issue becomes the life of the sail. Its clear that even dacron is fast in its first races (Arbella got #2 @the NA's with one). If you can pay a litte more for a Kevlar or other material and double the life of the sail that should be between you and your sailmaker. (I'm a pannel sail guy) New materials are going to come along and improve performance thru life expentency. The base foil remains the same.
2) #2 I've had one that was new when I got Falcon 8 years ago and I've raced with it zero times in one design and 2 or 3 times in PHRF. Kill the sucker its a dog.
3) #3 The sail is to small to give you the punch in the 14 knot range the extra 15% will give it some more drive.
4) Carbon spin poles. No one is going to change out a pole that works for a carbon one (If money was no object we would be sailing 105's) The weight difference is less that a 12 pack of beer!
5) Adjustable tracks If someone wants to spend the money fine but its not going to win the N/A's for you

In general I feel that all the proposed changes are good for the class. None are required to sail in the N/A's None will make the difference in winning the N/A's That is more based on good starts excellent crew work and a little bit of luck.
Lets get these changes made so we can balance one design and the rest of the racing that we all do. this is a nation wide class and we need to balance every ones needs

Charlie Stoddard

My next planned sail purchase is a #1. I race PHRF, as Thor and I are the only J30s on the lake. I had been planning to buy a kevlar 155. I expect I will consider a 163 if these changes are made. Although, it depends somewhat on Thor, so that we can race with the same PHRF #.

Thorsten, did you ever determine if you have a 155 or 163? I have both and will bring an equal sail for our next meeting. Will you be at the Whale? By the way, I think you jib horns are already cut off. I'll show them to you on Foghorn the next time we meet.

Isn't it great when someone proves your point while disagreeing? J30falcon never uses the #2, but the #3 is too small!? Our #2 is up in exactly those 14-18 true conditions when everybody else is lugging their main and wrecking their #1 or underpowered with a #3. We used it at the NA's in Cedar Point and Annapolis, and this past spring at the NOOD. It sees nearly as much action as our Kevlar #3 and as a result our genoa holds up longer than most.

Meanwhile, I have a sneaky suspicion some of you bought Kevlar #3's soon after they were approved in 1997 and they're due for replacement. Well, we had a perfectly good Dacron #3 in 1997 and continued to use it. Now I have a $2,200 #3 with six races on it, and a remaining life span of five years. If I had any idea that a change was even under consideration, I would have certainly waited. One-design classes do not survive if they intentionally obsolete their sails or equipment without any advance planning or notice.

The #1 is only a slightly different story, since they last about 2 years. Didn't some of you buy a genoa for this years NA's? The target should be at least another year or alternatively Oct 15, 2005 just prior to the New Orleans NA's for the benefit of that fleet. I'd be surprised if there is anyone who has a #2 that's less than our ten-year-old Dacron. So I'd change that first. Here's my proposal:
#2 optional and unrestricted material Jan 1, 2005
#1 unrestricted material Jan 1, 2006 (or Oct 15, 2005)
#3 size change Jan 1, 2007 or later. (Although I favor never!)

[This message has been edited by Bob Rutsch (edited 08-24-2004).]