Ideal trailerable sailboat - theoretical approach

[Infinity First 20]

Thank you Jackdaw!

Agree, once you're up and running sailing the 25S single handed should be a breeze

I did ordered the the boat with Beneteau's mast lifting kit and in addition I consider ordering the trailer with a mast holder and raising winch.

I got 3 quotes one from a builder that supports the Beneteau dealership in Annapolis and the two other from Loadmaster and Triad. The local guy is the least expensive about 20% less then the two other quotes.

so many options when it comes to trailers. I am a bit lost which one to go with.

BTW, on top of my list is the boomkicker - good call!

Cheers,
Dave

 

[Jackdaw]

Thank you Jackdaw!

Agree, once you're up and running sailing the 25S single handed should be a breeze

I did ordered the the boat with Beneteau's mast lifting kit and in addition I consider ordering the trailer with a mast holder and raising winch.
Cheers,
Dave

That's interesting that Beneteau now has a mast raising kit that is independent of the trailer. I wonder if they will do the same for the 25s. As was the 260 before it the boat was not really designed for trailering... The swing keel was a way to allow a deep draft keel on a small boat designed to be used in high tidal areas (Brittany and the UK). At 5000 lbs empty she is way beyond 99% of average Europeans ability to tow. But in the US? We will have to wait and see. At 9 feet of beam she needs permits to leave the yard.

PS if you plan to trailer the boat a lot I would get as much of the mast raising hardware as you can. My old 235 had the same mast and it was alway like a moon shot getting it up.... Lots of good engineering involved but still millions of things that could go wrong! ;-)

 

[John Curry]

Here are a few items that might be of use to infinity first 20. First be careful if you follow jackdaws threads,soon you'll end up with more mods that you know what to do with. In my case it started with the fusion stereo after watching his YouTube video and the next probably going to be the code 0, and a trip to the apostle Islands.

Anyway, I imported a Jeanneau Sun 2000 which has similar specs to your 20. I have to give a great recommendation to loadmaster trailer of Port Clinton Ohio. They built a very beefy trailer off the CAD drawing. I picked the boat up in Baltimore, and the longshoremen loaded it on the trailer and it fit. I drove back there and they are able to tweak it a little bit as well.

On the mast raising kit, I Opted to save the 900 bucks and built one off a sketch provided from an owner in Europe. It's not stainless steel but I covered it in pipe insulation foam ,works great.

I have the tohatsu 6hp hp 4 stroke long shaft. fairly happy with this. Negatives are hard to get serviced and the screw mechanism for securing the motor in a fixed position fails after about two weeks of work.

I really like the first 20, and if I Was looking now, I probably would've bought one of these. It would've been a lot simpler.

Cheers!

 

[Infinity First 20]

Here are a few items that might be of use to infinity first 20. First be careful if you follow jackdaws threads,soon you'll end up with more mods that you know what to do with. In my case it started with the fusion stereo after watching his YouTube video and the next probably going to be the code 0, and a trip to the apostle Islands.

Anyway, I imported a Jeanneau Sun 2000 which has similar specs to your 20. I have to give a great recommendation to loadmaster trailer of Port Clinton Ohio. They built a very beefy trailer off the CAD drawing. I picked the boat up in Baltimore, and the longshoremen loaded it on the trailer and it fit. I drove back there and they are able to tweak it a little bit as well.

On the mast raising kit, I Opted to save the 900 bucks and built one off a sketch provided from an owner in Europe. It's not stainless steel but I covered it in pipe insulation foam ,works great.

I have the tohatsu 6hp hp 4 stroke long shaft. fairly happy with this. Negatives are hard to get serviced and the screw mechanism for securing the motor in a fixed position fails after about two weeks of work.

I really like the first 20, and if I Was looking now, I probably would've bought one of these. It would've been a lot simpler.

Cheers!

Thank you John for the thoughtful insight regarding the trailer. If it wasn't for my daughter who I love infinity I would name the boat KISS - for - keep it simple stupid

I know what it takes to over complicate and fit a boat so this time it is pure sailing, and ease of handling out of the water.

Besides the obvious trailer and the mast/lifting kit I only plan to add a vang (boomkicker) - the http://www.riggingandhardware.com/p...ings-for-boats-19-ft-to-20-ft-long-k0500.aspx looks very basic and I like the design - but I am still searching.

Cheers

 

[doehunter]

Water ballast has its biggest weakness in the fact it does not work until it is above to waterline, thus making the boat very tender untill higher heel degree is achieved. While this can be counteracted partially by hull lines, solid ballast will work right from the start making the boat stiffer.
I would not argue about water ballast boats tenderness but the statement about the water not working until it's out of the water is false.
Think about what you are saying.
The ballast is in a narrow tank that runs lengthwise in the bottom of the hull.
Now fill that tank with lead. Would it still not work till it's out of the water?
It doesn't matter what it's filled with. It could be 1200 lbs of feathers, or water it's all the same.
Imagine looking at a crossection of the boat. There is a point somewhere above the bottom. Maybe 1/3 of the way up, that the boat rotates around when it heels. That means that the water ballast comes out from under that point and begins to apply righting force immediately.
They are "tender" because the distance from that neutral point and the hull makes a short lever when compared to the lever length of a full keel or even a weighted swing keel.
The water ballast boats have a couple of advantages.
Obviously they are lighter on the trailer. But u you can dump the water when you need to, say like if you drift into a sand bar and get stuck.
Dump the ballast and it might just float off!

 

[Jackdaw]

Water ballast has its biggest weakness in the fact it does not work until it is above to waterline, thus making the boat very tender untill higher heel degree is achieved. While this can be counteracted partially by hull lines, solid ballast will work right from the start making the boat stiffer.
I would not argue about water ballast boats tenderness but the statement about the water not working until it's out of the water is false.
Think about what you are saying.
The ballast is in a narrow tank that runs lengthwise in the bottom of the hull.
Now fill that tank with lead. Would it still not work till it's out of the water?
It doesn't matter what it's filled with. It could be 1200 lbs of feathers, or water it's all the same.
Imagine looking at a crossection of the boat. There is a point somewhere above the bottom. Maybe 1/3 of the way up, that the boat rotates around when it heels. That means that the water ballast comes out from under that point and begins to apply righting force immediately.
They are "tender" because the distance from that neutral point and the hull makes a short lever when compared to the lever length of a full keel or even a weighted swing keel.
The water ballast boats have a couple of advantages.
Obviously they are lighter on the trailer. But u you can dump the water when you need to, say like if you drift into a sand bar and get stuck.
Dump the ballast and it might just float off!

Hunter,

You're right, with a clarification. It DOES matter what that ballast is made of. You are correct, it can be lead, water, or feathers. All will contribute, but lead (vs water) will help lower the boats CG and its righting moment. This is make the boat stiffer, more powerful and faster, all else being equal.

The trick is that all is is not equal when you play this game, lead might make it stiffer, but faster? Depends on the rig and the resulting SA/D ratio. I can image what in lots of points of sail a water ballasted 260 might be faster than a 260 with lead ballast.

 

[philwsailz]

No. If it is removable ballast, 1200 lbs is 1200 lbs. assuming you can fit 1200 lbs of anything in the bottom of the boat, the boat absolutely does not care what the ballast is.

People get tripped up with density perception. Lead is heavier, so it might not fill the ballast tank at 1200 lbs. feathers are light, so you might stuff the ballast tank full and not get there.

BUT, if magically, (it is Christmas Eve) you can get 1200 lbs of anything in there, assuming any item you choose to shove in there will end up at 1200 lbs exactly, the boat will not care. Mass is mass and the boat can't tell what the mass is made of

 

[Jackdaw]

No. If it is removable ballast, 1200 lbs is 1200 lbs. assuming you can fit 1200 lbs of anything in the bottom of the boat, the boat absolutely does not care what the ballast is.

People get tripped up with density perception. Lead is heavier, so it might not fill the ballast tank at 1200 lbs. feathers are light, so you might stuff the ballast tank full and not get there.

BUT, if magically, (it is Christmas Eve) you can get 1200 lbs of anything in there, assuming any item you choose to shove in there will end up at 1200 lbs exactly, the boat will not care. Mass is mass and the boat can't tell what the mass is made of

Of course. But how tightly can you pack 1200 lbs of feathers?? If you try hard enough, maybe, but them you might as well use lead.

Density DOES matter. It effects your CG, and your righting moment.

 

[philwsailz]

Of course. But how tightly can you pack 1200 lbs of feathers?? If you try hard enough, maybe, but them you might as well use lead.

Density DOES matter. It effects your CG, and your righting moment.

Explain how density matters please???

Density only matters in that you can get a lot of WEIGHT/MASS in a small area.

Assuming it occupies the same space,1200 lbs of lead and 1200 lbs of feathers have the same effect

 

[philwsailz]

Density helps as it makes it easier to get a lot of weight/mass where you need it, but the equation for force is mass*acceleration. If you got the mass, you got the force, regardless the volume, (density)

 

[Jackdaw]

Explain how density matters please???

Density only matters in that you can get a lot of WEIGHT/MASS in a small area.

Assuming it occupies the same space,1200 lbs of lead and 1200 lbs of feathers have the same effect

Merry Christmas Phil! ;^)

Well, you ARE assuming it matters, if you need to get the same weight of feathers into the same space (density) ;^)

If you don't, the area is bigger, and the CG is higher. And that's worse.

 

[Jackdaw]

Density helps as it makes it easier to get a lot of weight/mass where you need it, but the equation for force is mass*acceleration. If you got the mass, you got the force, regardless the volume, (density)

I agree. Weight/displacement (or the lack of it) is a key function of speed.

But mass (as part of a CG calculation) is key to a good righting moment, and that gives power.

 

[philwsailz]

Merry Christmas!!

Hah hah. We are on the same page then.

I was being quite careful since so many people think water doesn't work as ballast, since it is in water....

Ballast is ballast.

We then also agree that a lesser volume of lead would be required to get the weight equal to the water ballast, but that water ballast works as ballast even under the water line....

 

[Sumner]

Merry Christmas!!

Hah hah. We are on the same page then.

I was being quite careful since so many people think water doesn't work as ballast, since it is in water....

Ballast is ballast.

We then also agree that a lesser volume of lead would be required to get the weight equal to the water ballast, but that water ballast works as ballast even under the water line....

You guys are doing a good job but here also is a link that debunks a lot of water ballast myths....

http://h260.com/water_ballast/water_ballast_index.html

Merry Christmas everyone and we have one with water and one with lead and love them both ,

Sum

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]============================[/FONT]

Our Endeavour 37

Our MacGregor 26-S Pages

Our Trips to Utah, Idaho, Canada, Florida

Mac-Venture Links

 

[Jackdaw]

You guys are doing a good job but here also is a link that debunks a lot of water ballast myths....

http://h260.com/water_ballast/water_ballast_index.html

Merry Christmas everyone and we have one with water and one with lead and love them both ,

Sum

Sum,

Thats a really decent explanation of the mechanics. The premise is right on. It only glosses over two things; first the the importance of the distance between the CG and CB and its positive effect on the the righting moment. It why you see keels with bulbs etc. Moving the CG lower makes a HUGE lever. No amount of water ballast could ever make up the math.

The other point is misses is that the change in the CB relies on that part of the submerged area being BUOYANT. If it is filled with water, its not, and the hull must roll farther to create buoyancy. EDIT - Does not happen if tanks are completely below the waterline, which is almost always the case. Maybe always!

Its also a cool web site. That guy LOVES his 260!

 

[philwsailz]

The other point is misses is that the change in the CB relies on that part of the submerged area being BUOYANT. If it is filled with water, its not, and the hull must roll farther to create buoyancy.

Okay, careful now, your statement here verges on one the pseudo-scientist would claim... That somehow having water inside the hull makes it non-buoyant where any other material would preserve buoyancy....

Is that what you are suggesting????

 

[Jackdaw]

Okay, careful now, your statement here verges on one the pseudo-scientist would claim... That somehow having water inside the hull makes it non-buoyant where any other material would preserve buoyancy....

Is that what you are suggesting????

Nope.

What I'm saying is that the boat stops rolling when the center of buoyancy moves far enough to the side to create the required CZ to resist the heel. If there is no buoyancy in the part of the hull which is being submerged, then that initial roll has no effect.

But I suppose that can only happen if the water tanks are about the initial water line, so maybe that's not really an issue! ;^)

 

[Sumner]

... Moving the CG lower makes a HUGE lever. No amount of water ballast could ever make up the math....

I believe that he made that point. The Mac D and S have 1200 lbs. of ballast vs. the Mac/Venture 25, the model before it, that had a swing keel that weighed 625 lbs.. Just going by what owners that have both have said it seems once they get around 10-12 deg. of heel they are very similar in tenderness. The 26D is a fair amount faster than the 25 with a PHRF of about 213 vs. 231 for the 25. As you can see the Mac S and D have fairly high PHRF ratings, higher than a lot of boats that people post that are suppose to be faster boats, but aren't.

The main point of his article is to show that a water ballast boat doesn't have to lift the water ballast above the water before it starts working.

......The other point is misses is that the change in the CB relies on that part of the submerged area being BUOYANT. If it is filled with water, its not, and the hull must roll farther to create buoyancy..

I guess I'm not seeing what you are describing in the illustrations. The boat is sitting down in the water with the water ballast so the the submerged area is buoyant and retains the same buoyancy as it heals. The boat doesn't sink further into the water as it heals from what I can see or being on one.

.......Its also a cool web site. That guy LOVES his 260!

He actually owns a MacGregor 26D water ballast classic (not the powerboat model).

All boats are compromises. Ours might be a little more tender in the first 12 degrees of heel, but then firms up pretty well. It is easy to trailer all over the country. We live in Utah and have had the boat from Canada to Florida which has been a big, big deal for us. We have gotten to explore over 500 miles of new to us water in the past few years. How many....

...fixed keel boats or even heavier swing keel boats are you going to launch off a bank like above without even a ramp.

They are what they are one just has to decide if they are the right boat for them....

We haven't sold the Mac and will probably have her long after we sell the Endeavour as for us she is just so much more versatile. We bought the Endeavour for some pretty narrow needs, but important ones for us right now,

Sum

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]============================[/FONT]

Our Endeavour 37

Our MacGregor 26-S Pages

Our Trips to Utah, Idaho, Canada, Florida

Mac-Venture Links

 

[philwsailz]

Nope.

What I'm saying is that the boat stops rolling when the center of buoyancy moves far enough to the side to create the required CZ to resist the heel. If there is no buoyancy in the part of the hull which is being submerged, then that initial roll has no effect.

But I suppose that can only happen if the water tanks are about the initial water line, so maybe that's not really an issue! ;^)

Gotcha!

Hull form has a lot to do with that. A Buddy had a Bayliner Buccaneer many years ago and it had zero initial stability, even with a swinging keel. The shape under water had to have been basically just a round barrel. I hated that boat...

 

[Jackdaw]

I believe that he made that point. The Mac D and S have 1200 lbs. of ballast vs. the Mac/Venture 25, the model before it, that had a swing keel that weighed 625 lbs.. Just going by what owners that have both have said it seems once they get around 10-12 deg. of heel they are very similar in tenderness. The 26D is a fair amount faster than the 25 with a PHRF of about 213 vs. 231 for the 25. As you can see the Mac S and D have fairly high PHRF ratings, higher than a lot of boats that people post that are suppose to be faster boats, but aren't.

The main point of his article is to show that a water ballast boat doesn't have to lift the water ballast above the water before it starts working.

He actually owns a MacGregor 26D water ballast classic (not the powerboat model).

All boats are compromises. Ours might be a little more tender in the first 12 degrees of heel, but then firms up pretty well. It is easy to trailer all over the country. We live in Utah and have had the boat from Canada to Florida which has been a big, big deal for us. We have gotten to explore over 500 miles of new to us water in the past few years. How many....

Sum,

I'm in total accord. Water ballast boats are a great compromise. Our Beneteau 260 is on a trailer and is ramp 'launchable' with a lifting keel, But that keel weights 1500 lbs and the whole boat 5000. I really have no desire to take her anywhere really, its just way to much work!