J/30 Class Association Forums J/30 Forum The Boat, Sails and Equipment Class legal mainsail

I am shopping for a new mainsail, and am looking at dacron to remain class legal keep the expense down. I have spoken with a few makers about cut and have received differing opinions. One maker says you shouldn't use dacron in a triradial design because the sail looses its shape quickly, you should only do a crosscut with dacron. Another maker says triradial is fine with dacron but specified use of Contender's Radial Wide dacron, which is apparently made specially for radial constructions. A friend has one of these and loves it - the shape is fine after three seasons.

There don't appear to be any class restrictions on the mainsail design. Are there any opinions out there on triradial dacron mainsails? Anyone using one? I'm also considering adding some roach so that the sail will hit the backstay tacking over. Is that legal?

There's relatively few limits on the design of the main. See class rules 5.12.2. There's a max mid-girth measurement of 2621mm which effects the amount of roach. Cloth weight must be at least 6.25 oz.

Does anyone have interest in reconsidering the dacron restriction on mains? An arguement could be made the total cost of ownership is not higher with composites when you consider the longevity. Has anyone been hit with a phrf penalty for a composite triradial main (I wouldn't think so)? I think most sailmakers would steer away from a dacron trirad because you're paying mostly for labor (compared to cross-cut) - the marginal difference for the better material is relatively small. Brad - did you ever build the trirad dacron?

I have a triradial technora composite main that was used in a successful racing campaign (predating me) for 10 years. I have used it as a cruising sail for the last 4. It's worn, but I expect I could race with it.

I have a Pentex tri-radial main made by a super local loft with a tons of J boat experience in Stamford CT. It has worked great for me. I believe the material is class legal, is supposed to be about 50% more resistant to stretch and is lighter than dacron.

You might lookm into this option.

Sailing mostly PHRF, I have tried both Dacron and composites, I do not think that the $$$'s for the composites are worth it for a boat the size of a J-30. They probably are slightly faster out of the box, but age faster. Dacron can still be stretched to a decent shape after a few years. My Dacron main has done well competing against other PHRF boats sailing with composite sails (3rd Key West, 2nd Block Island). However, I do race with composite headsails.

Ed Austin
Chinook

gwylan, thanks for the info - you are correct Pentex is legal and worth considering. My understanding is it is 2x stiffer than Dacron 52, but more porous (probably why it is lighter). Have you raced the Pentex and for how many seasons? Who made it?

I originally meant to gauge the interest in non-polyester fiber/polyester film sails compared to woven polyester.
Thx Seth.hunter@i-stat.com

Ed, thanks for the feedback. Sailmakers and IMS friends are telling me the price of composites is dropping and longevity is increasing, expecially once you bite the bullet for labor to build a triradial sail. But I can't speak from first hand experience. Did you take rating hit for the composite?
Seth

I would take a 1 sec hit for sailing with OD sized sails and a composite main, from 135 to 134. However, I race with PHRF sized sails (155, 11.5" pole, and 180% SMW chute), at 143. I would not take a hit for a composite main in that configuration.

Seth, several years ago we had a bunch of sailmakers come in to advise the Ches_Bay fleet about changes in sail inventory. Since then, we've kept a pulse on advances in technology. At that time, and reiterated since then, the belief was that a "high-tech" material didn't have significant life or speed advantages vice a woven dacron main for a boat with a main the size of a J/30. The key differences between headsails and a main, is that the main has to be suitable for all weather conditions and that the main lives its life on the boom, getting flaked or rolled. It may not be sexy, but it does seem to work well over time.

I did not take a hit from PHRF-LIS or PHRF-KWRW for composite sails. Neither penalizes for sail material. I have several other PHRF optimizations that were not penalized - I do not think I would perform one that would be penalized.

Seth, I have not raced with this Pentex main, so I can't speak to how competitive it is or isn't.

The folks who make all my sails are Z Sails in Stamford CT. Great loft, nice people, and they test, design and build all their sails at the loft. They have made a number of sails for some of the best J/30 racers and cruisers on LIS.

They know J/Boats well and have campaigned a J/24 with some great regional and national results. The web site is www.zsails.com

Thanks for all the info - yes, the guys at Z are very nice to work with - I just got a new "Z" #3 (my first sail from them). For what it's worth, PHRF-MA rates OD at 138, PHRF at 141, and "does not penalize for material". But, if I change sail material, I default up to 141 and take 9 spm hit (by PHRF bylaws) for OD pole and #1 to 132. Effectively 6 spm hit for a "no penalty" change.

I had a north 3dl on a catalina built in 1996,Used really only 3 series of wed night racing. I disintigrated in 2000 on the one time I used it and looked like a fish net. Here in the midwest summers can be hot and I wonder if the adhesive is drying out causing the failure. The manufacturers say they have improved this problem but how can I know for sure? My J-30 has composite sails that I use a few times a year and the rest of the time they are stored in the cool basement. I purchased dacron used sails to sail on the weekends and they are probably over twenty years old.

General question(s)...How many boats out there race both PHRF and One Design events? Of those, how many carry some aramid (kevlar etc.) inventory for PHRF racing? Of those who do carry an "extended" inventory, how many receive a rating hit for extending beyond One Design sail limitations (as per SHunter above)? Any and all input welcome.

Some additional points: (1) sail material change is a proxy; the rating hit also applies to any deviation from OD rules. (2) -9 spm came by email from PHRF-MA; when I read their bylaws, I come up with -6 (I think our OD #1 is >170). (3) PHRF-MA maintains the PHRF base rating should be 141 even though they've issued no certificates. The purpose of the heavy hits, they say, is to discourage OD owners from deviating from their respective class rules. Their advice... "you don't want to go there."

Sorry, typo... I think PHRF-MA thinks a J/30 #1 is >170 and therefore miscalculated the penalty.

Adding to Steve's question, how many have verified with their PHRF district that they're sailing with the correct rating using non-OD sails? I suspect if more do, there will be more interest in the class to relax the rules on sail weight and material, like other J classes. To answer Steve's survey (although he already knows), I sail about 25-30 races/year PHRF, 0 OD.

Here on Lake Michigan, a PHRF J/30 is rated 144 (155 & J length pole), where a class J/30 is rated 138.

I race mostly PHRF, but 1-3 OD regattas/yr. I choose to keep my sails one design compliant. As far as I can tell against the PHRF J/30s I've raced against, we more than make up the time we owe them.

Dennis,

YOu're just good.

Dennis,
Are all J/30's in your district with non-class sails racing with PHRF rating, or just those with 155's and short poles? (ie are all J/30's with OD rating fully class compliant?) That seems not to be the case in the MA and LIS districts.

The interesting thing is, with a base PHRF rating of 144 minus 3 sec for the 163 and another 3 for the penalty pole, a Lake Michigan 30 could race PHRF w/ non class sails and still rate 138 (I think I understand that there is no penalty for sail cloth other then making a boat start at the base PHRF rating, instead of a pre ordained OD rating). Ugh... I'm just confused.

I formally requested Lake Michigan PHRF to reply regarding a change in rating if I sailed my J-30 OD with a kevlar (non-class material), tri-radial mainsail. The official reply was that PHRF does not rate sail material. I am currently racing with a four year old dacron main and a PHRF J-30 OD certificate at 138. If I raced PHRF with a laminated mainsail, what would my PHRF rating be, since the PHRF committee does not rate sail material? I have seen J-30's racing in one design regattas such as the NOOD with laminated mainsails and no apparent penalty (no apparent advantage either!). I tend to agree with the numerous comments that there is little (if any) advantage to laminates for mains in boats this size, so why continue the ban in the class rules?

If Michigan PHRF is similar to Midatlantic, they will tell you sail material is not penalized. They should also tell you that you then need to sail under the PHRF rating (144 from these messages), and take whatever adjustments are required by the bylaws, i.e., -3 for pole and -3 jib size.

The 144 Michigan PHRF rating makes sense to me - it nets you back to 138 when pole/jib are penalized, reflecting no penalty for material (although you should have a certificate that shows which configuration you're sailing). Midatlantic is, by their own words, "discouraging non-OD sailing" by making the PHRF base faster; i.e., 141, creating problems for J/30's with different inventories sailing in PHRF fleets - driving up the cost of ownership by requiring boats to buy both OD and PHRF sails. The class could ease this by relaxing the restriction on material (we all seem to agree it's not a performance penalty).

Bobbie...

If there's no difference in speed between a class main and Kevlar (or other high tech materials), why spend the money on them?

If Planxty were to get carbon fibre headsail and main and beat everyone on the racecourse, wouldn't people think its the sails and feel the need to keep up?

Zephyr a year ago won the NAs not with some high tech 3DL thingy, but with a simple paneled mylar headsail.

I think the class would like to not turn this into an arms race, but keep the J/30 an affordable boat to sail.

The bigger issue re: sail inventory in PHRF is the use of lighter weight cloth for spinnakers and genoas. Most PHRF boats sail with 1/2 oz chutes and light #1 jibs that are cut fuller than our class sails. In order to be competitive in light air PHRF racing (we all know the 30 is not a light air rocket) it really helps to have the lighter sailcloth.

The bigger issue re: sail inventory in PHRF is the use of lighter weight cloth for spinnakers and genoas. Most PHRF boats sail with 1/2 oz chutes and light #1 jibs that are cut fuller than our class sails. In order to be competitive in light air PHRF racing (we all know the 30 is not a light air rocket) it really helps to have the lighter sailcloth.

Dennis, if you are referring to the NA's in Chicago, Zephyr was using a new "dacron" from North called "Sharkskin" with a mylar headsail (I do think it was a tri-radial headsail). She was quite fast as I recall. However, the main and I believe also the spinnaker from Zephyr were purchased by Bill Anderson and are now on Hallel. Bill is fast, but not as fast as Zephyr. I also suspect the cost of a "sharkskin" dacron main from North would exceed the cost of composite mains from other suppliers.

I am not advocating an arms race. I just feel there may be some personal preference regarding materials, and obviously there can be advantages in lighter air with lighter materials and PHRF racing competition. Unfortunately, due to the variability of PHRF ratings, it will never be possible to keep all districts happy regarding this issue.

I think the class should consider expanding the allowable sails to include a light #1 jib and a 1/2 oz. chute, but restrict purchases to one headsail and one chute per year. This would prevent an arms race but allow boats to be more competitive in PHRF fleets, without an adverse rating impact. We should not forget that the majority of J-30's race primarily PHRF, and all owners share an interest in the success and viability of both the One Design fleet and boats racing PHRF.

Actually, I rather like PHRF-MAs approach, discourage people from deviating from OD configuration.

As one who sails here, I don't think MA's approach is fair or equitable. It promotes rule-breaking. The class could expand the rules to allow lighter chutes and #1's, relieving PHRF of the arbitrary, punitive penalties (i.e., not designed to promote a fair game), and use SI's to control inventory in OD events.

Seth, I disagree most emphatically with your last post ... although I will defend to the death your right to say it! ;-) Beyond just J/30s, I feel that it's up to a given _class_ to set the standard. PHRF organizations should then validate the one-design rules. PHRF should hold to its stated belief that any modification to the one-design configuration, where one exists, is a deviation from the de-facto standard and is assumed to be speed-producing.

I think much of this discussion is a "where you stand depends on where you sit" (or sail} issue. Here on the Ches_Bay we have an active one-design calendar, so our default is one-design with PHRF as an after-thought. You've got the converse situation. Here PHRF of the Ches_Bay is unconcerned about the well-being of any given one-design fleet, the J/30 Fleet, like any one-design class, looks out for the best interests of its members.

On the specific sail issues, I remain unconvinced. I don't think that:

- Light #1 genoas,
- Laminated mains, and/or
- Lighter than .75 oz nominal chutes (which are closer to .5 oz actual weight

are cost-effective at the margin. All the high-tech sailcloth in the world isn't going to change the fundamental speed potential of a J/30, although it will definitely have the effect of raising the bar for costs to compete. Nor do I feel that (with the exception of the #3) high tech materials have a significant advantage in longevity.

I still don't see how expanding the inventory but limiting purchases would create an arms race. Having more than one primary headsail and chute means that each sail is used less, lengthening life span. At the same time, boats racing PHRF most of the time would then have inventories comparable to the competition.

J-30's are known to have ratings that disadvantage us in light air, and anything the class rules do to improve light air performance helps those of us racing in PHRF (and we do need help in light air). It also would make class light air racing (I hear there is occassionally light air down in Annapolis) a little more fun!

Joe, I disagree with that analysis and don't think that's PHRF's stated objective. Nonetheless, the class has clearly ruled in this forum that it's interest lies with the OD community that have the ability and privilege to sail exclusively with other J/30's. With that I'll bow out of this forum and thank you all for your comments.

Anyone have an estimate of the fration of total races by all J30s averaged together that are OD, PHRF, Other? I believe PHRF is the vast majority since OD racing occurs in few places. (Just how many sites have active J30 OD racing?)

At any rate, the PHRF rating spreads for either OD or PHRF base seem trivial. When's the last time 1-3 sec/mi made a difference?

By the way, I have a light #1. It's a 155, like my all purpose #1. I find it quite usefull in less than 5 knots. However, against boats that are light air specialized
I don't think there's anything to help us short of a masthead kite!

One thing I have noticed is that my kevlar main is A LOT lighter than my dacron main, but at 13 years old I'm not racing with it.

I also have to disagree with the above PHRF statement. If you are PHRF racing, the PHRF fleet sets the rules. Most fleets have defined penalties for deviations from maximum sail sizes. If you fly OD J30 sails you will be penalized. SOme, but not all PHRF fleets are nice enough to give OD boats a break if the total PHRF penalties are seen to be harsh. PHRF is not in the business of monitoring the OD class requirements of potentially dozens of diverse boats. When's tha last time the draft stripes were checked on a J30 in a PHRF fleet, what about equipment inventories? My PHRF fleet considers PHRF base the standard. Deviation is discouraged, but allowed with penalty. OD is tolerated witha slightly lesser penalty for the J30, but only 1 sec less than it would otherwise be.

Mark, obviously, I'm not a PHRF guru, but my understanding was that the whole concept of One-Design Ratings under PHRF was to do exactly what I discussed -- let the Class determine the most appropriate configuration for a boat -- then rate that specific configuration. I assume that PHRF made the realization that their sail restrictions were completely arbitrary, for example the 155% genoa limitation, esp when a lot of sport boats were coming out with blade jibs.

On the question of one-design races, I know there are limited opportunities in other areas but I can tell you off the top of my head that we had about 20 boats qualify last year with almost 30 racing days of one-design racing here on the Chesapeake.

20/545 = 3.7%.

Any others out there?

Mark, I can't let you get away with that. That's bogus! If you wanted to make a fair comparison, you would compare the number of boats * days raced by the fleet. Our AVERAGE is 12 boats on the line for every event! From what I can tell on this board there are less than a dozen active J/30 PHRF racers ...so:

12/545 = 2.2% Any others?

I am sure there are more than 12 J-30's that actively race PHRF-I know of seven between lower LIS and Raritan Bay.

I think however that this discussion of which is the bigger proportion of racing 30's is totally beside the point. I think that even purely from a resale standpoint, it would be a good idea if class rules were tailored a bit to make the boat a bit more PHRF friendly. I find it interesting that there has been no comment on the possibility of an expanded more PHRF competitive sail inventory with restrictions on frequency of sail purchases. This would seem to be a formula that would both keep costs down and PHRF light air speed up.

We have allowed other modifications to OD rules that have nothing to do with the quality of one design racing (spin pole track extensions, self tacking traveler, rigid vang, kevlar #3, aramid halyards and control lines etc.). Why is the possibility of changing sail restrictions/expanding inventory (especially w/purchase limits) so troubling?

I do think the Annapolis contingent should be more aware of the concerns of PHRF J-30 sailors. Try sailing week after week in 7 knots of breeze against S2 9.1's and J 29's with a full complement of light air sails-can you say "dirty air"?

jmruzzi,

Please excuse me if my comments seem to be an attack. I'm an academic researcher. I argue for a living.

Honestly, I suppose none of this matters to me. My PHRF fleet lets me race PHRF base, and it seems unlikely that I'll ever manage to load her up on her trailer and head off to a J30 OD event. but...

I don't find my statement bogus at all. Do we get counted buy race or by boat? At any rate, how many areas have active J30 OD racing? Ches_Bay seems to be most of it. A bit more here and there occasionally on the East Coast? (How much?) Some in Chicago. An occasional invited event in New Orelans (Do they manage to race OD in NO any other time?). Is there anything else? Anywhere?

So, about how many J30s race in at least one OD event each year? 50 (50/545 = 9%)? The class site still seems to be goobered from the recent hacking, but in 2001 there are a few events listed that I expect account for almost all J30s that race OD. I count less than 35 boats (35/545 = 6%). Was there anyone else not listed that raced OD in 2001? A few I'd guess, but not many.

How many boats have been measured as class legal in the last 5 years? 10 years? How many truely class legal J30s exist? I guess few and there will be fewer as the boats continue to age and pass to new owners with projects in mind.

How many race in at least one PHRF race each year? I admit this is hard to guess but 250 (including most of those mentioned above)? (250/545 = 46%).

Should Ches_Bay (and maybe Chicago) dictate the conditions under which the majority of J30s race?

Mark

I certainly think Mark is probably close to correct on the numbers of active racing 30's, but...

I do think having a strong one design rule is very important both in terms of sustaining quality OD racing, and helping the boats hold value. Since the largest OD contingent is based in the Chesapeake, it is only common sense that rule modifications would emanate from there. However, I think it would be a good idea to have a governing body that includes some sailors who race both PHRF and OD, and I do think sail restrictions should be liberalized.

'Nuff said.

Amen.

Though I wish it weren't true, all of the J/30 racing here on Loch Mich is PHRF. We're not even able to get 8 boats for the NOOD these days (though I hope that will change next year).

There are 6.5 active boats here in Chicago, doing probably 15-25 races/season.

I still think however that for me, remaining J/30 one design is more cost effective. Just one opinion however.

Mark, I'm a systems engineer and program evaluator, I look at the big picture for a living (and get into more than a few arguments). The reason there is a class is because a group of people committed to one-design sailing has kept it alive for almost 25 years. There is a process for changing the rules and it's been that way since the rules were codified. Nobody _dictates_ anything! We have been through this process several times in my involvement with the class to change other rules. We have a set of District Governors who are the governing board. _Anything_ which changes the rules has to be done through the current process. It's not just a case of Annapolis-based sailors sitting around and thinking "hmmmm...let's not change the rules just to screw the PHRF sailors". Nothing could be further from the truth. The governing body is composed mostly of people who sail both PHRF and one-design. In fact, the current J/30 Class co-Presidents are Carl Sherter and John McArthur from Long Island Sound and the past-President is Dennis Bartley from Chicago. Both of these sailors, sail more PHRF races then one-design (as Dennis stated above). Look at the Governing Board page on this site. As I count it, the Chesapeake Bay has exactly one sailor listed on the Governing Board, Larry Christy who is the Ches. Bay District Governor and Class Measurer. We've been down the sail change road before and we've made changes when they have been shown to be cost-effective. Dennis Bartley, in the posting above, echoed that sentiment.

A light #1 will not turn a J/30 into a light-air sled -- it ain't gonna happen! Is a J/30 slower than a S-2 9.1 in light air? Yes, I think it will be. Could it have more than a little to do with a masthead genoa and the ability to project more surface area (472 vs 444 sq ft for 100% sail area)? Perhaps .... I know where I'd bet.

Another question is, will a light 155% be significantly faster than a slightly heavier 163%? I don't think so. Notice, we're not talking about bulletproof storm-sail material here, the rule is 3.5 oz material. The laminated genoa is not heavy material. We weighed genoas about 3-4 yrs ago when we were considering a change to a "bag weight" rule for the genoa, We found that the high tech constructions were no lighter than conventional mylar laminates. How many folks have actually gotten a bunch of genoas and weighed them? We're talking empirical data here! This is what one-design people do in the interest of the class.

A year of so earlier, we brought in a bunch of sailmakers to discuss changes in the inventory. Some of them had run velocity prediction programs to evaluate changes ... again real data, not speculation. Their consensus was that there wasn't a cost-effective reason to change the laminated mylar genoa or the cross-cut main. On the chute, they were specifically asked to look at polyester spinnaker cloth, because that was all the rage. They felt that it wasn't a good option for us. In fact, their comment was "we could make a lot of money selling you guys these sails because they would explode the first time your chute emptied and filled, but we don't think that would be good for the class." The one change that they had a consensus on was the move to a kevlar #3 because of the better high wind tolerance of kevlar vice the dacron material. The Governing Board then voted to change the rules to allow Kevlar #3s for the following season. No one is trying to go back to Egyptian cotton sails dyed with tan-bark. It's a question of having real data and then following the Class' process for making a change to the rules.

Whew, I feel better now! :-) As Mark said before, this is not meant to be an attack on anyone. I do however, feel strongly about these issues.


[This message has been edited by jmruzzi (edited 08-28-2003).]

Kevlar is not as good as the sharkskin mains built by North Sails in New Orleans. I have a 8 year old Kevlar J/30 main if anyone is looking...

Warning, this is a long post, based on what I learned while J/30 Class President. By 1999 (the last time I had control over the Class database) we had accounted for 409 boats. I sailed on hull #1 in Miami in the 1988 Midwinter's and sailed past #547 in 1995 on my way to the NA's. First, there are not 547 boats. The records indicate a 25-hull gap between 149 and 175, probably unrealized overseas production. After deducting the J/30s reported lost, including six in Hurricane Alicia in 1983 at Houston YC I figure there are about 500 left. So I was aware of about 80% of the J/30s remaining.

The 'vocal minority' of J/30 owners in this forum are racers of two types. One-design sailors have something they wish to protect and perpetuate. PHRF racers either enjoy playing the handicappers game or accept it as their lot in life for choosing a boat, club, or a home port that doesn't have a one-design fleet at all, or at least not in a boat of their liking.

So, it might surprise to learn that most J/30s are cruisers. The two biggest factors for choosing a J/30 (after choosing a size and price range) are the head and the inboard diesel engine. Perceived performance comes next. Some, but not many, buy the boat because they wish to race one-design.

Here's a breakdown by region. Chesapeake Bay has about 65 boats accounted for. Half are cruisers or inactive racers. So far in 2003, 25 have raced one-design on the weekends or Wednesday nights. About ten more sail PHRF in their home port, with all but a couple using strictly one-design sails and equipment. Long Island Sound has more than 60 boats with 30 active racers. Cedar Point has a nice one-design fleet of about a ten boats. There's a pocket of boats in City Island/Manhasset/Larchmont. The rest, spread out on both sides of the Sound are club racers: Riverside to Black Rock. Oyster Bay to Port Jefferson. They rarely leave their own harbor to do a J/30 or YRA race. Most have class sails but may carry a PHRF size/cloth genoa or kite.

Southern New England (RI, Buzzards Bay, Nantucket) with at least 70 boats has the largest percentage of cruisers. When there is a local NA regatta, they generate about 10 boats that have no problem qualifying under class rules. Chicago has a dozen or so, half racing, primarily using class sails but in PHRF races. New Orleans and the surrounding Gulf coast is working towards a nice fleet (10+), and appears to be making the transition from pure PHRF (with GYA's the crazy 170% genoa limit) to class sails.

That's more than half of the boats accounted for (240+/-). I'd estimate that about 120 are racing one-design or in class trim and 10-12 are using non-conforming sails or equipment.

J/30 Fleet 1 was in Holland Michigan. Once upon a time (1981) there were 'Fleets' in Marina del Rey, Lake Ontario, Puget Sound, Portland (Maine & Oregon), Galveston, Atlantic City, Detroit and Miami. Some never got off the ground, others died off. The J/30s in these areas have no alternative but to race handicap. Or go cruising, which based on hundreds of phone calls and emails I get or have gotten over the years is what the unaccounted for J/30s do. I routinely search around the country, using the internet for other J/30s that are racing in far off places. I rarely find one I haven't seen or heard of before.

In the last four-year NA cycle (Barrington RI, Chicago, Cedar Point CT, and Annapolis) 57 different boat/owner combinations have sailed in the NA's. During the ten years prior to that, there were a total of 161. During that entire period, only about 4 or 5 boats that I can think of had to put away their PHRF rags and buy or borrow class sails.

So I'd say a more reasonable assessment is that one-design (and one-design suited) racers probably exceed those with PHRF sails, probably by a ratio of at least 2:1.

Enough said for now. I'll save my opinions on handicapping and sails for another time.

Clearly, Bob has a deeper knowledge of this issue than I can claim. However, I think his totals are distorted by his casual insertion of the fact that some boats w/ primarily OD inventories also carry some sails outside class limits. I know several boats that race OD at the NA's that also have inventories of sails that are not class legal.

The problem with the class rules (in my opinion) is that they limit sail purchases to one set of class legal sails per year. This rule makes no note of PHRF boats, who can (depending on wallet size) buy limitless PHRF sails and still qualify for OD sailing under the one set of class sails per year rule. The only limit on sail purchases for PHRF/OD boats is set by the degree to which local PHRF governors insist on class inventory limits (this seems to vary greatly by district).

I still maintain that the best solution (offered before without any response from the class association) would be a slight expansion of inventory limits to include a light 1 and 1/2 oz chute coupled with a limit on total sail purchases of any kind (say 3 per year), in order to insure competitiveness for boats racing PHRF without incurring increased cost, while at the same time not causing conflict with local district regulations.

I also think several races at this years NA's would have been even more exciting if a 1/2 oz chute was available to use when conditions went light.

I know for a fact that purchase per year limits have been considered in the past; why not couple those with a slightly more PHRF friendly set of inventory limits?

I race against a well sailed 9.1 on Lake Michigan all of the time. When the wind is under 8 kts, neither a light #1 nor a .5 oz chute would be enough to make up for their speed advantage. The only way we can (and sometimes do) beat them is being smarter or make fewer mistakes.

The other side of the coin, once the wind gets above 12 the tables are turned.

Though I wasn't at the NAs this year, I somehow don't think a 1/2 oz. would have made the light stuff any less frustrating.

If sailing one-design is not an option in your area and it's PHRF or nothing, then you must get involved in the handicapping process. Or at least try to enforce the ratings on the race course, something that almost never occurs. Even where PHRF grants one-design ratings they can and do allow you to violate those very rules and specs on which the rating is based. An easy example is our owner-driver rule-- PHRF is unlikely to change your rating if you let someone else drive. So find out what they allow. If they let you carry two #1s, two kites, or a carbon pole, get it in writing before you spend your $dollars.

I have little enthusiasm for adding two additional $2+K sails, increasing my inventory by 40%. Stricter replacement limits means that in addition to choosing which sail to use in a race, I also have to decide which to replace (light or heavy, ¾ or .5) before the next big regatta. All for maybe a couple seconds per mile, which in a PHRF race is unlikely to make a difference. Meanwhile the PHRF competition can buy new sails anytime they want.

Although I don't have any official say in these decisions any longer, it may be time to relax the material restrictions on the #1 and #2. The restrictions on the #3 were eliminated in 1997. Our Dacron #3 was new the previous year, so it took six years for us to switch to Kevlar. During the intervening years I don't think we were at a disadvantage, but the new #3 is a better sail. While I'm a supporter of keeping the #2, several people have suggested it be made optional since they never use it. I also think we are approaching the stage where it makes sense to switch to a carbon fiber pole. The cost differential is shrinking and most people have 20-25 year old poles.


[This message has been edited by Bob Rutsch (edited 10-08-2003).]