Hi everyone - I just took ownershp of a 1972 OD'22 (for nothing), and had my first chance to go over it with a fine tooth comb this morning. In general she appears in pretty good shape (it was sailed just last week), and I'm looking forward to getting out on the water myself soon. I'm relatively new to sailing, and completely new to O'Days, so I have a few newbie questions. The previous owners have left for the summer, and I can't ask them so I'll ask you. Please excuse my ignorance! Inspecting (what I believe to be) the main halyard, mine has a D-shackle on the end of the line that's forward of the mast. My questions are 1. Is this really the main halyard? 2. If so, why is there a shackle in the forward end? I'd imagine the shackle would affix to the sail itself, but in my sailing class we always secured the halyard with a bowline. The reason I believe this is the main halyard is that it's the only line running over a sheave that leads aft of the mast. Maybe it's a topping lift or something? I've never seen this setup before (my sailing experience is limited to one boat, a 23' Sonar). Also, my chainplates for the shroud have been replaced - I know the mast was lost once in this boat's lifetime. They were replaced with some creative galvanized u-bolt that's bleeding rust and will need to be replaced. Should I just replace this with a stainless version of the same U-bolt (it looks like a pretty beefy and secure design), or should I order original replacement chainplate parts from O'Day (I'd like your opinions here!) Another question - I believe the jib sheets on this boat run through a block that's permanently fixed to the hull, and then continue to the winch and then a horn cleat back in the cockpit. This rig is also unfamiliar to me. The boat I sailed had an adjustment for the jib blocks, and cam cleats to hold the lines (for quick sail trim adjustment). Has anyone modified this, and should I bother? I'll be daysailing, not racing. And (Finally!), the deck above the cabin has several cam cleats and fairleads, but I'm not sure why they're there. I know this boat used to have a roller furling jib (no longer) - would that be for the furling line? That's enough for now. Thanks in advance for any input or instruction you could provide me!
- Status
new boat
I also replaced the chain plates on my 1974 22 and did so just because Rudy said that there had been failures in the past- If I were you I would make sure the ones you have go thru the plywood bulkheads in the cabin - this is an improtant detail for strength - if possible spend the 50 bucks and replace the galv with ss chainplates - its up to you and what you are comfortable with About the front sail is it a roller furling sail? I have one with my boat that I do not use yet - (it came with the boat ) for me this is a winter project to set up - for you this would explain the loop on the front halyard - Like usual I have tried to teach someone everything I know, and you still don't know anything- ( ha ha)-- I do hope that this helps a little. Algae
I also replaced the chain plates on my 1974 22 and did so just because Rudy said that there had been failures in the past- If I were you I would make sure the ones you have go thru the plywood bulkheads in the cabin - this is an improtant detail for strength - if possible spend the 50 bucks and replace the galv with ss chainplates - its up to you and what you are comfortable with About the front sail is it a roller furling sail? I have one with my boat that I do not use yet - (it came with the boat ) for me this is a winter project to set up - for you this would explain the loop on the front halyard - Like usual I have tried to teach someone everything I know, and you still don't know anything- ( ha ha)-- I do hope that this helps a little. Algae
re:
thanks for your reply. There's no roller furling on it right now, but there was one in the past. But how would this explain the loop on the front halyard?
thanks for your reply. There's no roller furling on it right now, but there was one in the past. But how would this explain the loop on the front halyard?
re re
I'm not real sure but I have put my roller furling up with the front halyard and this would work quite well with a loop because the spin bearing can use the loop to connect to. I am not sure if roller furling came standard with this boat and there could be many ways to rig up a roller - I hope to get mine the way that I want it this winter when I an not so busy sailing. Maybe you can help me - Is there a fitting (that is stainless and screwed the mast) about 14" or so below the top of the mast facing forward - one that a cable could be attached to? There is one on mine and was wondering if it was used for an extra cable for the roller furling.
I'm not real sure but I have put my roller furling up with the front halyard and this would work quite well with a loop because the spin bearing can use the loop to connect to. I am not sure if roller furling came standard with this boat and there could be many ways to rig up a roller - I hope to get mine the way that I want it this winter when I an not so busy sailing. Maybe you can help me - Is there a fitting (that is stainless and screwed the mast) about 14" or so below the top of the mast facing forward - one that a cable could be attached to? There is one on mine and was wondering if it was used for an extra cable for the roller furling.
Ed
Hi Ed, I have owned my '76 O22 for six months. I'm no expert but I can probably help. Both main and jib halyards on my boat are 1/4" line which is eyespliced to 1/8" wire cable. The cable for each halyard attaches to a D shaped shackle which secures to the peak of each sail. The main halyard is on the starboard side, jib is to port. I don't believe the boat was originally equipped with a topping lift. I would strongly suggest that you replace the chainplates with the original equipment in order to stay within the specifications of the original design. The people who design boats do a lot of calculating to make sure that loads are distributed properly. Make sure you use stainless steel screws to attach the chainplates to the bulkheads. Like many production sailboat manufacturers, O'day used "minimal" hardware on the boats to keep it cost effective. The deck mounted stand-up blocks and horn cleats are all the original equipment for handling the jib sheets. My boat is still equipped thus. It works fine, but doesn't allow much fine tuning between jib and genoa without an adjustable car and the horn cleats are less convenient than a cam cleat would be. I am guessing that the fairleads and camcleats on your coach roof are for rigging the boat so that the halyards can be led aft to the cockpit. Nice feature. Roller furling controls are usually led aft along the deck. Now you can answer me a question. Are you familiar with the famous Captain Joshua Slocum? He was from Fairhaven, built his legendary sloop "Spray" there in Oxford Village, right next to pilgrim John Cooke's grave. Are there any "relics" there in Fairhaven to commemorate this? It was in the 1890's, but he was VERY famous. I would love to visit the site, but since I'm on the opposite side of the country, I have to depend upon the observations of locals such as yourself! Thanks, Ed! Clay
Hi Ed, I have owned my '76 O22 for six months. I'm no expert but I can probably help. Both main and jib halyards on my boat are 1/4" line which is eyespliced to 1/8" wire cable. The cable for each halyard attaches to a D shaped shackle which secures to the peak of each sail. The main halyard is on the starboard side, jib is to port. I don't believe the boat was originally equipped with a topping lift. I would strongly suggest that you replace the chainplates with the original equipment in order to stay within the specifications of the original design. The people who design boats do a lot of calculating to make sure that loads are distributed properly. Make sure you use stainless steel screws to attach the chainplates to the bulkheads. Like many production sailboat manufacturers, O'day used "minimal" hardware on the boats to keep it cost effective. The deck mounted stand-up blocks and horn cleats are all the original equipment for handling the jib sheets. My boat is still equipped thus. It works fine, but doesn't allow much fine tuning between jib and genoa without an adjustable car and the horn cleats are less convenient than a cam cleat would be. I am guessing that the fairleads and camcleats on your coach roof are for rigging the boat so that the halyards can be led aft to the cockpit. Nice feature. Roller furling controls are usually led aft along the deck. Now you can answer me a question. Are you familiar with the famous Captain Joshua Slocum? He was from Fairhaven, built his legendary sloop "Spray" there in Oxford Village, right next to pilgrim John Cooke's grave. Are there any "relics" there in Fairhaven to commemorate this? It was in the 1890's, but he was VERY famous. I would love to visit the site, but since I'm on the opposite side of the country, I have to depend upon the observations of locals such as yourself! Thanks, Ed! Clay
Thanks, Clay!
Clay- Thanks very much for your insight. After fiddling around a little (after I sent the original email), I figured out the 1/4" line to 1/8" wire halyard. I guess I finally learned that what goes up does not necessarily come down! Your other comments were also very helpful, as I begin to make sense of my new toy. As far as Joshua Slocum goes, I'm intimately familiar with him and his story! Matter of fact, I live very near to the spot where he refurbished, launched, and returned with the Spray (there's a map and plaque commemerating his voyage there).Many things in my town are named for him - my high school yearbook, for example, is named the Spray. "Sailing Alone around the World" was required reading for us in grade school. (To others - if you haven't read it yet, I highly recommend it. It's a great story of a true adventure. I read it as a schoolboy and later as an adult.) I do believe that Josua Slocum was a Canadian, originally from Tiverton, Nova Scotia. I learned this by accident - I was hiking through Nova Scotia a few years back and happened upon a memorial very similar to the one in my home town! Unfortunately Fairhaven can only take credit for part of his legacy. Thanks again!
Clay- Thanks very much for your insight. After fiddling around a little (after I sent the original email), I figured out the 1/4" line to 1/8" wire halyard. I guess I finally learned that what goes up does not necessarily come down! Your other comments were also very helpful, as I begin to make sense of my new toy. As far as Joshua Slocum goes, I'm intimately familiar with him and his story! Matter of fact, I live very near to the spot where he refurbished, launched, and returned with the Spray (there's a map and plaque commemerating his voyage there).Many things in my town are named for him - my high school yearbook, for example, is named the Spray. "Sailing Alone around the World" was required reading for us in grade school. (To others - if you haven't read it yet, I highly recommend it. It's a great story of a true adventure. I read it as a schoolboy and later as an adult.) I do believe that Josua Slocum was a Canadian, originally from Tiverton, Nova Scotia. I learned this by accident - I was hiking through Nova Scotia a few years back and happened upon a memorial very similar to the one in my home town! Unfortunately Fairhaven can only take credit for part of his legacy. Thanks again!
The "original" chainplates... +Slocum
Clay says: "I would strongly suggest that you replace the chainplates with the original equipment in order to stay within the specifications of the original design. The people who design boats do a lot of calculating to make sure that loads are distributed properly." I'm sure they do, but in this case, they made a big boo-boo. As Al said, Rudy will sell you improved chainplate "U" bolts. There is no modification to install them, exept drilling out the deck and chainplate holes slightly. The problem with the originals was that they were only 1/4 stock. After they were threaded, with coarse threads, the thickness at the threading was far too thin. Rudy at D&R told me that hundreds of boats were dismasted, and so the mod was made up. This is probably what originally what happened to your boat, Ed, before you got it... as the chainplates were replaced. So get the beefy ones... they are only about $40 for the pair. By the way, when I took my 1/4", original U-bolts off, one of them simply broke from the light force I applied to wrench! Not something to go sailing with. And on Slocum... since you are interested in him, you might want to catch an article I wrote for the April issue of Ocean Navigator. It's called "Searching For Slocum's Clock". It's about my search for the identity of the famous "old tin clock", and how I found my own copy of one. It was news to most Slocum/Spray enthusiasts that the clock could ever be identified, and apparantly, no-one had yet tried. Rich.
Clay says: "I would strongly suggest that you replace the chainplates with the original equipment in order to stay within the specifications of the original design. The people who design boats do a lot of calculating to make sure that loads are distributed properly." I'm sure they do, but in this case, they made a big boo-boo. As Al said, Rudy will sell you improved chainplate "U" bolts. There is no modification to install them, exept drilling out the deck and chainplate holes slightly. The problem with the originals was that they were only 1/4 stock. After they were threaded, with coarse threads, the thickness at the threading was far too thin. Rudy at D&R told me that hundreds of boats were dismasted, and so the mod was made up. This is probably what originally what happened to your boat, Ed, before you got it... as the chainplates were replaced. So get the beefy ones... they are only about $40 for the pair. By the way, when I took my 1/4", original U-bolts off, one of them simply broke from the light force I applied to wrench! Not something to go sailing with. And on Slocum... since you are interested in him, you might want to catch an article I wrote for the April issue of Ocean Navigator. It's called "Searching For Slocum's Clock". It's about my search for the identity of the famous "old tin clock", and how I found my own copy of one. It was news to most Slocum/Spray enthusiasts that the clock could ever be identified, and apparantly, no-one had yet tried. Rich.
Say, Rich...
Thanks for the extra info regarding the chainplates. My point was that it is probably unwise to try to "out-think" the engineers who originally designed the vessel. Modifying original equipment with new components that are excessively robust can cause a failure in the next weaker component. However, in this case where there is apparently a history of failure, I concede. Frankly, I thought the weakest part of the system was the shortness of the chainplates as they bolt to the bulkhead, placing the holes very close togther in the plywood. It looks like great potential to rip out. I'm glad this discussion took place, guess I'll go inspect my chainplates tonight! You found a copy of Slocum's clock?? What did you use as a reference, the Thomas Fogarty sketch from the book? Did you have to "boil her" to get her to keep the hours well enough? Forgive me, I could go on about Slocum all day! Could you post a picture of the clock? Clay
Thanks for the extra info regarding the chainplates. My point was that it is probably unwise to try to "out-think" the engineers who originally designed the vessel. Modifying original equipment with new components that are excessively robust can cause a failure in the next weaker component. However, in this case where there is apparently a history of failure, I concede. Frankly, I thought the weakest part of the system was the shortness of the chainplates as they bolt to the bulkhead, placing the holes very close togther in the plywood. It looks like great potential to rip out. I'm glad this discussion took place, guess I'll go inspect my chainplates tonight! You found a copy of Slocum's clock?? What did you use as a reference, the Thomas Fogarty sketch from the book? Did you have to "boil her" to get her to keep the hours well enough? Forgive me, I could go on about Slocum all day! Could you post a picture of the clock? Clay
They are sort of close together... and the clock:
Those bolt holes are sort of close together, aren't they? I made up one set of new brackets for the port side, and used 3 bolt holes instead of the original 3. But I did not get around to the starboard side yet. I always look at the size of the "U's" on other O22's. There are two in my marina, and both have been converted. I think it's old history... most have been done already years ago. Mine missed somehow... and I thank Rudy for saving me. Just today I was in a washing machine of conflicting waves in Haverstraw bay, and the pounding that puts on the rig is even worse than a steady wind pull. Anyway... about the article... and my search: I can't post the whole article until one year after publication... but I suppose a small scan of the picture I took would be O.K. It's at: http://www.put.com/~proto57/still_life1.jpg and another of the same model clock: http://www.put.com/~proto57/welch.jpg I had always wondered whether the Fogarty/Varian sketch was of a real clock, and if so, an accurate representation. In the article, I give several reasons why I was felt it was. Then the question of whether the sketch was of Slocum's clock was answered when I read that Teddy Roosevelt's son, when he visited the Spray around 1906, recognized the actual tin clock in the cabin. So it matched the drawings... I then made a mechanical drawing, and sent it to many clock collectors and dealers... around 80 or more, I think. I got one response: The clock is an 1890 E.N.Welch "Little Lord Fauntleroy". Interestingly, it is much smaller than you would think... this is the reason I took the still life. In Robert's Spray book, an imaginary sketch of Slocum's cabin shows the clock as big as Slocum's mug. But it's only about three inches across! And it's not an alarm clock, as others have surmised. Not tin either... it's nickel plated brass. Unworn, it would resemble tin. But it's clearly the clock... the roman numerals, the faceted handle... the rivits holding the ball-feet, the proper age, the cheap price... and so on, all make it unlikely it is any other model. But get a copy of the article, if you can find it (maybe your library?). In the article I point out the clock's importance... that it was Slocum's way of poking fun at the increasing reliance on technology, and the passing of the age of sail. He used the Lunarian method, and really needed no clock at all, of course. The issue is: Ocean Navigator, March/April 2002, Issue Number 120. And find your copy of the clock before they are all gone! There are over 1000 Spray replicas, and when word gets around (the president of the International Slocum Society wrote me), the world supply of Little Lord Fauntleroy 1890's will dry up quick (I have two now)! Rich.
Those bolt holes are sort of close together, aren't they? I made up one set of new brackets for the port side, and used 3 bolt holes instead of the original 3. But I did not get around to the starboard side yet. I always look at the size of the "U's" on other O22's. There are two in my marina, and both have been converted. I think it's old history... most have been done already years ago. Mine missed somehow... and I thank Rudy for saving me. Just today I was in a washing machine of conflicting waves in Haverstraw bay, and the pounding that puts on the rig is even worse than a steady wind pull. Anyway... about the article... and my search: I can't post the whole article until one year after publication... but I suppose a small scan of the picture I took would be O.K. It's at: http://www.put.com/~proto57/still_life1.jpg and another of the same model clock: http://www.put.com/~proto57/welch.jpg I had always wondered whether the Fogarty/Varian sketch was of a real clock, and if so, an accurate representation. In the article, I give several reasons why I was felt it was. Then the question of whether the sketch was of Slocum's clock was answered when I read that Teddy Roosevelt's son, when he visited the Spray around 1906, recognized the actual tin clock in the cabin. So it matched the drawings... I then made a mechanical drawing, and sent it to many clock collectors and dealers... around 80 or more, I think. I got one response: The clock is an 1890 E.N.Welch "Little Lord Fauntleroy". Interestingly, it is much smaller than you would think... this is the reason I took the still life. In Robert's Spray book, an imaginary sketch of Slocum's cabin shows the clock as big as Slocum's mug. But it's only about three inches across! And it's not an alarm clock, as others have surmised. Not tin either... it's nickel plated brass. Unworn, it would resemble tin. But it's clearly the clock... the roman numerals, the faceted handle... the rivits holding the ball-feet, the proper age, the cheap price... and so on, all make it unlikely it is any other model. But get a copy of the article, if you can find it (maybe your library?). In the article I point out the clock's importance... that it was Slocum's way of poking fun at the increasing reliance on technology, and the passing of the age of sail. He used the Lunarian method, and really needed no clock at all, of course. The issue is: Ocean Navigator, March/April 2002, Issue Number 120. And find your copy of the clock before they are all gone! There are over 1000 Spray replicas, and when word gets around (the president of the International Slocum Society wrote me), the world supply of Little Lord Fauntleroy 1890's will dry up quick (I have two now)! Rich.
Attachments
- Status