Pearson 10M - Junk Rig Conversion

[Scott Dufour]

Hi,

I'm in the initial stages of converting my 1979 Pearson 10M to a junk rig with an unstayed mast, which requires me to move the mast to the open area of the v-berth, just forward of the curved bulkhead for the head. The mast will doom the forward hatch, which I'll replace even further forward. I'm confident of the reinforcing structural changes I'll make to the deck and the installation of the mast step.

My question is regarding how to handle the cosmetic repairs to the liner sole and vertical portions that I need to cut out in order to create the mast step. Does anybody have experience in plunking mast in the v-berth and making it look good after?

 

[kloudie1]

Don't take this as severe criticism, but as an engineer, it is very offensive to me (not you, I understand) about taking something that is efficient and making it much less so. I understand you want to do that, but it might be better to buy a purposely designed junk rig.

 

[Scott Dufour]

In the same spirit, don't take this a severe criticism, but as both an engineer and the owner of my boat, I think that it's my choice. To be offended so quickly, with so little information, strikes me as un-engineery.

It's not uncommon to for people to have your response, but you are passing judgment without full knowledge of my circumstances. Not the least are my economic situation, my purpose for the boat, long-term plans, the aerodynamic elements of my rig (it ain't your granddaddy's junk), the ease of reefing, gybing, tacking (talk about efficiencies) are equally non-existent. I of course realize that anytime someone makes changes to a design, there will be others crying, "heresy". I am a bit surprised that it only took 10 minutes for the first stone-thrower to respond. Perhaps before getting offended, it may be best to ask a few questions? What is the spirit of this forum?

I would hate to see this thread descend into a discussion of the merits of various rigs - perhaps we could start another thread for that conversation? No doubt there are many passionate opinions. But this is a question of cosmetic restoration after a modification. I'd like to stick to that topic.

 

[Ron20324]

[QUOTE... it only took 10 minutes for the first stone-thrower to respond. Perhaps before getting offended, it may be best to ask a few questions? ....[/QUOTE]

Scott, you gotta realize how this works. Say, you have a project/subject of which you seek knowledge from the 89,000 members of this forum. So you post a question. Over the years I've noticed that about the first three offerings you will get are, in no particular order: 1) Why do you wanna do THAT?" ; 2) You SHOULDN'T do that" ; or, 3) Here's what I did". And you go from there with other answers, some of which will address your posted question, some not.

 

[Jackdaw]

Jester.

25 foot folkboat modded for a junk rig.
2nd place in the OSTAR single handed transatlantic race.

Go for it.

 

[jssailem]

Scott. You offer a controversal idea to a sailors group who spend time restoring their boats and sharing ideas. Then when questioned about the idea you complain and attack the first opinion as if it is a group response.
Why not share your ideas. Let us see a glimpse of your creativness.
You appear to seek ideas for the V-berth but share nothing about how you see the space or how you see the total interior space.
Your movement of the mast will change everything about the structural design of the boat. With the weight and force moved forward so moves the CG of the boat. Do you desire an open minimal bow space to compensate for this change?
Maybe if you expand on the vision you may find ideas forth coming from the many talented and skilled boat owners here on this forum or....
You may find you want to move your disscussion to a website focused on radical boat design.

 

[Scott Dufour]

Good suggestions, John.

Leaving the performance/handling items aside - perhaps I'll post that in another thread - you're questions about the interior space are great.

I'd like to preserve the v-berth space as much as possible - in essence just dropping a 8.5" cylinder on the centerline at its foot. The boat is to be a passage maker - think cross Atlantic sailing. The ground tackle will be moved aft during long passages, but will probably remain in the forepeak when making short coastal cruises. I'm toying with a way to move the chain locker to the base of the new mast someday, but I don't really see a practical way to do that and keep the openness of the v-berth for that is so enjoyable for sleeping at anchor.

The sacrificed hatch will be replaced with a forward sloping one about two feet further forward, then coach roof blended around it.

I'll remove the small starboard side locker at the base of the v-berth in order to allow access around that no-obstructive mast. But I would like to figure out how to make it all look nice after those changes are in place.

 

[Benny17441]

Oh, another grand entrance. Perhaps is a bit early to question the spirit of this forum. Yes, from time to time we question motives and reasoning when presented with a radical idea. We like to make sure the owner knows what he is doing. For us is also part of the learning process as well as gathering additional information to provide a better response. No need to take things personal nor be overly sensitive about questions or comments. The way this works, is you ask a question, sift through the responses and pick out those that you consider the best. The rest you may ignore. I for one cannot offer any response to your question at this time. It is unlikely that you will find a Pearson owner here that has converted his boat to a junk rig and since you are in the early stages of the conversion perhaps it would be best to revisit the issue at a latter date when pictures of the area to be restore could be provided. Welcome to the forum.

 

[kloudie1]

When I say "Offended" I mean offended in the sense of a backwards step .. say a guy brings a Ferrari into a shop and wants to change the engine compression ratio to 7:1.. Can he do it.. sure it is technically feasible; . Should he do it? yeah it is his car.. would that offend me as an engineer; yes, even though he tells me that he wants to burn regular gas in the car instead of premium.. Not saying he shouldn't do it.. There are other advantages to burning regular fuel, sure.
I would not advise a guy to not follow his dream and I would try to mention a better way o accomplish what he is seeking..
In this case, maybe going half way and starting with a Freedom or a Hunter Vision.. They already have unstayed masts and the structure to accommodate that..going to a junk rig would be a pretty straightforward exercise.. Not trying to start a whizzing match here, just expressing my opinion..

 

[Scott Dufour]

Well, I've gone back and re-read my second post, and I'm not impressed. It's ironic that I accused somebody else of being easily offended. I'm sorry about that, kloudie1.

The line about the spirit of the forum was actually just a poorly worded rhetorical question - the spirit of the forum is clearly free and open exchange of ideas. I'm sorry for the clunky phrasing, all the rest of you.

Ron20324 & Benny17441 - absolutely correct.
kloudie1 - I hear what you're saying, and I appreciate the feedback. I do hope to later post some specs that might have you reconsidering, when I have time.

For the moment, I'd like to point anybody who is curious about the lunatic fringe's recent experiments in Junk Rig aero toward this article on Practical Boat Owner. Slieve McGalliards design has a lot going for it - and it should work well with a hull as sweet as the Pearson 10M. The small crowd over at the Junk Rig Association isn't a tin-hat group; there's real grass-roots self-funded science going on there. If we put the kind of resources into developing this rig in the same way we have the Bermudian over the last 100 years, then perhaps we could have rigs that are high performing while maintaining all the safety, low expense, and ease of handling of a junk.

My boat is part of that experiment. Using kloudie1's analogy - I have a Ferrari chassis, handling, and areo(hydro)dynamics, but I am testing a different form of engine in her. Would it be best to develop a test platform from the ground up? Sure. But I don't have the time and I don't have the money. I do have a Pearson 10M languishing in my yard, though, in need of a complete refit of all the standing rigging. So here's the chassis and frame of Ferrari with no motor. Can't afford a new motor, and also want to experiment with an alternate (wicked cheap / potentially great ) technology under the hood. Seems like a good use of my time and energy and limited capital. Let's see what happens.

Anyway, my apology again for the burst of adolescent sensitivity in post #3. Kinda embarrassing, that.

 

[kloudie1]

Well said, Scott.. welcome to the forum.