Black Widow vs VC-17M?

[stickinthemud57]

I currently have VC17M on my 26' boat and am considering going to Black Widow. Petit says VC17M has to be removed prior to applying Black Widow. Removing VC17M is easy or hard depending on whose post you are reading.

What I am wondering is whether Black Widow is significantly better than VC17M from a boat speed standpoint. The interwebs is thus far of no help.

Thanks!

 

[dlochner]

A few years ago I removed VC 17 from my boat. It was a bear to remove in some areas. Where the paint was worn, it was relatively easy with 40 grit sandpaper and a RO sander. In some areas where the paint had built up and not worn it was vey difficult. The sand paper would simply burnish the copper into copper plate before it would start to come off.

If I was to do the job again, I would:

1. Aggressively power wash the boat
2. Sail the boat for at least a season with no additional paint
3. Aggressively power wash the boat again
4. Invest is a good rotary sander with dust collection (Bosch and Fein make them, neither are inexpensive)
5. Use 40 grit sanding screens on the sander
6. Finish with 80 grit

Black Widow is marketed to racers looking for every competitive edge. At $300+ a gallon you have to be really serious about winning and if you are losing races by seconds, not minutes, then it may be a worthwhile investment. However if you are in the middle of the fleet there are probably a lot of things you can do to improve your performance and places to spend your time and money to improve your position in the fleet.

 

[stickinthemud57]

Thanks, much appreciated food for thought!

At the risk of hijacking my own thread...

As it stands, it really is a matter of seconds.

I sail a MacGregor 26S, which is not considered a "racing" boat in general, but in the final race of the recent series, I took the lead early and finished a full minute ahead of the closest boat in my fleet on a 45-minute course. Unfortunately, the second boat over the line was a Cat 22 with a PHRF of 270 as opposed to my 228, thus clinching first over me. :/ . To have clinched first, I would have had to beat them by an additional 43 seconds.

We sailed a clean race with no significant errors I can recall. The Cat 22 made at least one tactical error that added to our lead by probably 20 seconds or so. I might have been able to add more time by switching from my 105% jib to my 150% genoa on downwind legs, but that would have entailed 2 sail switches and the ensue loss of speed in each switch. I had a fill-in member on the crew, so opted not to.

So, the real question becomes: How can I shave a minute or more off my time over a 45-minute course?

Things I have done/am doing:
-New LiteSkin sails with maximized foresail which can fly inside the lifelines, which I can't do with the genoa.
-Installation and use of traveller for mainsail.
-Installation of airfoil rudder
-Coaching for technique and rigging optimization (ongoing)
-Keeping the bottom clean (scrubbing monthly or more during racing season)
-Raising the centerboard on downwind runs

Things I will be doing:
-Install outhaul adjustment to optimize loose-footed main shape
-Improve jib handling through rigging improvements, most notably winch (problems with stacking)
-Improving crew performance through selection and practice
-Improving skipper performance through study and practice

Things I am considering:
-Flying the 150% genoa on downwind legs
-Alternatively, ditching the genoa entirely and taking a more advantageous PHRF with a the 105% sail.
-Application and burnishing of Black Widow bottom paint.

The expense of the Black Widow paint is not that big a deal, but this thought experiment shows me there are other ways to improve performance that should be examined and addressed first.

Now, if someone pipes up with a real-world tested easier way to strip the VC17, that might change things...

 

[dlochner]

One simple test that might only cost a beer is to have the fleet scorer rescore the last race using the PHRF rating without the Genoa. These of course would not be official results, but it would give you a real life example of what you could do.

Whether you swamp headsails for the downwind race and take the PHRF penalty would depend on a couple of factors, the typical wind conditions and crew skill at changing the headsail.

If race conditions are predominantly light winds, say 5-10 knots then it may pay to swap sails and in really light air use the 150 on the up wind leg, you'll have to foot off a bit more, but the increased speed may be worth it and as the apparent wind increases you'll pick up some of the lost heading. Once the wind starts getting much above about 10 knots the advantage of the larger sail begins to decrease to the point where the boat may gain speed but increase heel and leeway.

Depending on how the forestay is set up, there are pretty efficient methods of changing head sails. The fastest way is to a twin track foil with 2 halyards and a second set of sheets. If you have this set up, you can raise and rough trim the new sail before dousing the old sail. If you have hank on sails or only have one halyard the advantage of a larger headsail begins to diminish because of the time it takes for the swap.

Weight reduction is also a strategy. Boats tend to collect stuff and that stuff slows the boat down. Put the boat on a diet, ration the beer, leave the ice home, keep only absolutely essential tools on board, etc. etc.

 

[Apex]

VC is our racing bottom. I think the advice is sound on changes that can make a bigger impact, esp. weight reductions.
New sails also make a huge impact. Have you created your own polars? How was boat speed according to your baselines? put the practice time in with the crew, know what you SHOULD be sailing at for speed, trim and heading according to the wind and sea state.


...Use acetone on the VC17 prior to re-coating or as a means for removal of heavy applications.

 

[stickinthemud57]

Weight reduction is also a strategy. Boats tend to collect stuff and that stuff slows the boat down. Put the boat on a diet, ration the beer, leave the ice home, keep only absolutely essential tools on board, etc. etc.

Yes, I should have included that in my list of considerations. Tallying up all the "non-essentials", I figure I could realistically lighten the boat by around 120 lbs. This is about 3.37% of the total weight of the boat and crew. I wonder just how much difference that would actually make.

 

[stickinthemud57]

VC is our racing bottom. I think the advice is sound on changes that can make a bigger impact, esp. weight reductions.
New sails also make a huge impact. Have you created your own polars? How was boat speed according to your baselines? put the practice time in with the crew, know what you SHOULD be sailing at for speed, trim and heading according to the wind and sea state.


...Use acetone on the VC17 prior to re-coating or as a means for removal of heavy applications.

I have not made any polars for the boat. Winds on our little lake are so variable that time spent compiling them would be difficult at best, without the instrumentation or know-how to use them to calculate optimum course on the fly, they would not be as useful, I think, as practicing and experimenting to get a better "feel" for what is working best. It is possible this is just laziness on my part.

My coach has helped tremendously, and I am building on the knowledge he has shared and the improvements in performance I have seen as a result.

Study and practice are essential, and it makes sense that they almost certainly will accrue more to my advantage than replacing the bottom coat.

 

[Jumpstart]

2 guys at our club “invested” in black widow 2 years ago. Stripped bottoms and multiple coats of black widow sanded to a super slick finish. The first haul out a good portion of the black widow came off with pressure wash. There was significant slime on areas where their cleaning did not reach. They removed the the Black widow and back to VC17 this year. Expensive lesson for some hardcore racers. Maybe it is called Black Widow because it gives you a heart attack after you realize how much money and effort you spent with little return.

 

[fstbttms]

Just sayin'...

 

[jssailem]

There are no easy answers i.e. "If I had the perfect paint".

You have a good path in the list you put together.

Confirm that your Rating is Accurate for your boat. Test the variations on your own. Why broadcast to everyone "Hey I got the scorer to drink a beer and he shared secrets".

Then practice the skills that make sailing fun. Smooth Helm. Smooth tacking and sail handling is Fast.

Polars are a mathematical revealer of your boat's abilities. They provide you a way to judge, am I sailing the boat to it's potential. If not used then you are essentially guessing. If they were easy everyone would use them.

You should be practicing 80% of your sailing time and 20% RACING. The reality is most sailors flip the ratio.

Boat weight, Starting, Tactical knowledge of your lake and winds, sailing trim. These are the subjects I find keys to skipper controlled skills.

I'd find a dinghy that is light with a big sail and go out on the lake a lot to understand the lake winds. You get isolated from the wind and water in a big boat.

 

[stickinthemud57]

Good responses, all. Thanks!

 

[dlochner]

Confirm that your Rating is Accurate for your boat. Test the variations on your own. Why broadcast to everyone "Hey I got the scorer to drink a beer and he shared secrets".

No secrets revealed, just asking the scorer to spend some of their time to rescore a race with a different rating. Seems like a fair thing to do.

If there is concern about rating, then it will be necessary to do some research on the ratings of his boat are in different regions. PHRF is based on regional ratings, allegedly based on the actual performance of a boat model across a number of races by many sailors. It is a system that is good in theory however in actual practice it would hard to think of worse rating system.

 

[Davidasailor26]

It’s not hard to figure out the effect of a different handicap in PHRF either, especially if the race is scored time on distance. You just need the corrected times and course length. Just subtract your current handicap from the one you hope to get, and multiply the result by the course length. That result is how many seconds your corrected time would go down.

 

[stickinthemud57]

It is a system that is good in theory however in actual practice it would hard to think of worse rating system.

Well, however flawed, we have to live with it or not race. When grumbling about the high PHRF of the Catalina 22, several have ventured the opinion that they should not be racing in Fleet 5, but in Fleet 4. There aren't enough competitors in Fleet 4 so they put my nemesis in Fleet 5.

I have analyzed the results using the technique Davidasailor26 suggested, and the race captain offered to go over the times with me and would be glad to fiddle with the variables. Already he has told me that going from a genoa to the 102% jib would only buy me three seconds. Seems odd, but there it is. Also, I have come to realize that you can make a jib with a significantly greater square footage area, but with relatively little increase in the percentage of the sail.

It's all good. I will have to hone my strategy, skill, and crew, which we will all benefit from.

 

[Davidasailor26]

Already he has told me that going from a genoa to the 102% jib would only buy me three seconds. Seems odd, but there it is.

He probably means 3 seconds per mile. That’s the smallest increment for PHRF handicaps.

 

[dlochner]

He probably means 3 seconds per mile. That’s the smallest increment for PHRF handicaps.

Twice around on a 1 mile course that is 12 seconds.

 

[stickinthemud57]

Twice around on a 1 mile course that is 12 seconds.

OK, I don't get it. How does 2x3=12? Is each "around" 2 miles?

Anyway, our distance was 2.44 nm, which by my math anyway comes out to 7.32 seconds. Not a lot, but often the difference between 1st and 2nd, and in some races between 1st and 6th.

It occurs to me that I might be mining for diamonds in a hog wallow. Fleet 5 is a motley crew, and our mistakes, miss-rigs, what-have-you, very quickly eclipse the few seconds that can be gained by applying a fresh bottom coat.

 

[Davidasailor26]

OK, I don't get it. How does 2x3=12? Is each "around" 2 miles?

I presume Dave means 1 mile from windward mark to leeward. So it’s 1 up, 1 down, 1 up, 1 down.

It occurs to me that I might be mining for diamonds in a hog wallow. Fleet 5 is a motley crew, and our mistakes, miss-rigs, what-have-you, very quickly eclipse the few seconds that can be gained by applying a fresh bottom coat.

Yes, that’s often the case in PHRF racing in general, except at the highest levels maybe. Given that VC-17 is already a very performance oriented paint it seems like there would be bigger returns that could be found than the time and expense to change to Black Widow.

 

[dlochner]

I presume Dave means 1 mile from windward mark to leeward. So it’s 1 up, 1 down, 1 up, 1 down.

Yes, I assumed a 1 mile leg. That will usually yield a race of about 1 hour.

 

[stickinthemud57]

This thread has morphed (appropriately) away from the question of stripping and re-doing the bottom coat (I will not for now). Something I have decided to do in the off season is remove everything possible from inside the boat and weigh it (rather than guessing weight as I have been doing). From there I will try to devise a plan for what goes back on and under what circumstances. Our boat is also our camper, so I have to strike a balance between what to keep on the boat and what to load on when we go out overnight. Should be interesting...