May 2009 - montgomery_boats - mailman.xmission.com

Fwd: research
by JAUICEO＠aol.com 25 May '09

25 May '09

____________________________________ From: JAUICEO(a)aol.com Reply-to: montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com To: montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com Sent: 5/25/2009 2:58:16 P.M. Central Daylight Time Subj: Re: M_Boats: research Jerry, as an old M-15 owner, and proud of it, it was the fun of my life, a little small, but one of the best sailing little boats in the world. I only wish now I had a M-17 by you and I would be a happy sailor again. One suggestion I have on your new venture, would be, if you are not going to have a compression post under the mast, then design in a compression arch in the cabin area under the mast and distribute the mast load down to the side walls and bunk areas in order to strengthen the cabin roof. Over the years I have been yearning for another Montgomery Boat (17) I have noticed that on the older 17s there are surface cracks developing where the Cabin joins the Deck in the areas of the Mast. I believe this could be some side loading being distributed down to the cabin/deck intersection. Other than this I would buy a good used M-17 in a heartbeat. Thanks for your time. John O In a message dated 5/23/2009 7:31:19 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jerry(a)jerrymontgomery.org writes: OK- got the canoe camping out of my system for awhile. I've got about two hours before the Lakers-Nuggets game (go Denver!) so I'll flap my fingers for awhile. This will be somewhat disjointed, probably. (Pun intended) Balsa Core- Yes, it has problems with dryrot if you get careless and don't keep the leaks in the bedding sealed, but there is nothing like it for stiffness with light weight. Ever notice that there are seldom stress cracks in the corners and angles on Montgomery decks? Balsa core. Sitting headroom- The concensus is that sitting headroom is important. I think we can do this. If we add 6" or so to the length of the house and lengthen and lower the bench aft of the v-berth it should work. Lowering the bench will cut down on storage some, so it's a compromise. For those of you who have sat below on a 23, it BARELY has sitting headroom under the side deck. I think the best we could do in a 16 would be to make it like the 17, where you have sitting headroom if you don't care about banging the back of your head against the side of the house. Some of you liked the quarter berth type interior, which can give good sitting headroom, but I've heard praises about the 15 interior as opposed to the Compac 16. I don't remember ever crawling into a comPac berth, but I've heard comments that it's difficult to roll over, as is the M-17. A couple of you sent links to X brand boats with a desirable interior and I haven't looked at them yet but I will. The sitting headroom thing is such a compromise; to get height over a quarterberth you usually need to raise the cockpit benches too much, and the geometry of the cockpit is really important, at least to me. Also remember that true sitting headroom is next to impossible without raising the freeboard, because you still have to get under the side decks. That's the reason for a flush deck cabin. like the Cal and Ensenada 20. Ugly, in my mind. Cockpit drainage- We had trouble with the 17, and when I retooled the 17 in about '82 I raised the cockpit 3/4", a nd put in a wetlocker. That helped but didn't really cure the problem. I really don't know how high the sosle is above thbe waterline, but it's several inches, believe it or not. I'm pretty sure that the 15 sole is 3" over the waterline, and it's better than the 17 but not perfect. One thing, the 15 cockpit angles forward and the 17 angles aft. In the 17, the wetlocker helped a lot because about 90% of the water, if pooped, would drain out pretty fast because of the two 2" holes a couple of inches off the sole. Rudder- Yes, I'd plan to do a kickup rudder, similar to the 15. If doing it over, I'd put the same thing on a 17 but i was afraid of losing a rudder now nd then, which happens to some of the competition. Note that Mike Mann 's 15 that he sailed to HI had a slightly shortened 17 rudder. The rig- Years ago I helped sail a Freedom 40 and the next smaller- I think a 34- from Newport to King Harbor, which is about 30 miles or so, mostly upwind. The gal that saialed with me was far more experienced than me on that type of boat, but upwind we just couldn't get the boat moving. We over sheeted, undersheeted, but nothing worked and we finally gave up and mixed a drink. Towards the last, when we eased off to a close reach the boat finally came alive and boomed right along. I think nothing is as effective as a good old Marconi sloop rig; a main and a jib. Without things like rotating masts and wing masts, nothing goes upwind like a sloop rig. Gaff rigs are kind of neat, an d if Doug Kelch lived around here you can bet that I'd be trying to weasel myself a ride. Same with cat ketches, but I want my boat to go well upwind and I'm willing to stumble over lots of wire and turnbuckles. Offset Centerboard- Hmmm. Getting the trunk out from under the cockpit sounds great, but how much would it slow the boat down? It's a given that it would, but how much? For years, whenm I lived in Newport Beach, I sailed Sabots everyh Wed nite at ou club. The sabot, as sailed in S CA, has a leeboard. We sailed the boat flat on the starboard tack and heeled over on port. The sabot was really a terrible little boat (an 8' pram) but was great fun to race because everybody had the same problem. Another thing, we made our little dinghies both ways; either a leeboard or a daggerboard. The daggerboard boats would KILL the leeboard boats upwind. I wonder if the main reason is that the turbulence between the leeboard and the side of the boat did something weird. I'd really be afraid that something like that would happen between the CB and the keel. In the new boat I'm lean ing towards a heavier, more efficient centerboard, more like te original 17's and yes, it would need a winch but yes, it would go faster upwind. Compression Post- I'd opt for no post, like the 15. It would take some serious stiffening, probably with carbon fiber, but could be done. I've done lots of work with carbon in 20 lb racing canoes and kayaks (see huki.com) and have it wired. I hate weight aloft because it's anti-ballast, and I'm sure that we could do it with no more weight than a post. Bridge Deck- Bitch, bitch, bitch! A wide bridge deck encroaches on the footroom of the crew, who just might want to sit up against the house, keeping the weight forward. A high bridgedeck does cut down on getting water below, but it makes a longer step to go below. I think the 15 is pretty well thought out in this regard. Just enough of a deck to make a place for the mainsheet cleat an d a cleat for the CB. Perspective of size- Remember that this project is probably a 16. A 16 would make a roomier and better performing 15. An 18 or 19 would make for a roomier and better performing 17, but it's not enough more room to allow a settee. Years ago I did some serious drawing on a 20, which barely would allow for a settee. It was so long ago that Lyle spent some time with me looking over my shoulder before he started loosing his vision. I'm not even sure that I still have those drawings; if I do they're in a box somewhere in the shop. My personal preference of these boats might be the 18 or 19, just because it would go faster and make it easier to win races! Any more suggestions or comments, keep them coming! jerry _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet! **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221823249x1201398664/aol?redir=htt p://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=May ExcfooterNO62) _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet! **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221823249x1201398664/aol?redir=htt… ExcfooterNO62)

1 0

new to me m-15
by mrh219＠yahoo.com 24 May '09

24 May '09

I have mostly been a lurker here, but my new-to-me m-15 arrived yesterday and has been launched for 1st sail. Question: attaching the tack of the jib. The bow fitting has a large opening and two smaller opening. I attached stay to middle small opening. Is the tack attached to large opening in front, or smaller one behind, and using what? Does the large front opening have a designated purpose?

2 1

Re: M_Boats: mast configuration
by GILASAILR＠aol.com 24 May '09

24 May '09

Bill, 100% mainsail luff engagement - bolt ropes rule! Another boltroper and d*mn proud of it! GO In a message dated 5/22/2009 6:55:30 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, wriker(a)mindspring.com writes: I am going to count this whole hassle as another checkmark in the boltrope column. Bill Riker M15 - #184 Storm Petrel -----Original Message----- From: montgomery_boats-bounces(a)mailman.xmission.com [mailto:montgomery_boats-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Tom Jenkins Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:28 PM To: For and about Montgomery Sailboats Subject: Re: M_Boats: mast configuration Dave, I agree 2-3" is a little low if you are rigging and unrigging often. How about a short cutout just above where the boom rides, which in my boat is about a foot up? With a track stop above the opening, you could drop the sail and secure it without it shooting out of the slot, or let it all run out for unrigging with some turns of a thumbscrew. As for reefing, my cringles reach the boom over the pile of sail, but there is probably lots of variability among years and between the 15 and 17. There was a great thread about modifications to the mast a number of months ago, so I will seek them out. Tom Jenkins M17 Scintilla ----- Original Message ----- From: "W David Scobie" <wdscobie(a)yahoo.com> To: "For and about Montgomery Sailboats" <montgomery_boats(a)mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:44 PM Subject: Re: M_Boats: mast configuration SWEET PEA's (hull #375, 1983 build) mast has the 'opening' set very low ... 2-3" from the cabin-top. i find it anoying thus far as i must leave ALL slugs in when reefing (so the reef is set a bit 'high' IMO) and i must load the sail and then the boom ... this is a big PITA. the setup adds about 5 minutes to the rigging process. SCRED, my M15, has the opening much higher - at least 18" above the cabin-top. this allowed for putting the boom in place and then loading the main easily and quickly. reefing was also a cleaner operation. it seems at times many boats leave jerry's and bob's shop with 'own custom options'. dave scobie M17 #375 - sweet pea (http://www.m17-375.webs.com) M15 #288 - SCRED (for sale, http://www.freewebs.com/m15-named-scred --- On Thu, 5/21/09, Tom Jenkins <tjenk(a)gte.net> wrote: Hello all, I assume the cutout on the M17 mast slot is designed to accomodate a boltrope main (by both size and location), but I find that it is not perfect for slugs. Among other things, one of my slugs falls right in the cutout on a double reef. Is there a reason why the cutout could not be, say, 8-12" from the mast bottom, assuming most newer boats come with slug-type sails? Thanks, Tom Jenkins _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet! _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet! _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet! **************A strong credit score is 700 or above. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222585033x1201462753/aol?redir=htt… cd=Maystrongfooter52309NO115)

4 4

research
by jerry 23 May '09

23 May '09

OK- got the canoe camping out of my system for awhile. I've got about two hours before the Lakers-Nuggets game (go Denver!) so I'll flap my fingers for awhile. This will be somewhat disjointed, probably. (Pun intended) Balsa Core- Yes, it has problems with dryrot if you get careless and don't keep the leaks in the bedding sealed, but there is nothing like it for stiffness with light weight. Ever notice that there are seldom stress cracks in the corners and angles on Montgomery decks? Balsa core. Sitting headroom- The concensus is that sitting headroom is important. I think we can do this. If we add 6" or so to the length of the house and lengthen and lower the bench aft of the v-berth it should work. Lowering the bench will cut down on storage some, so it's a compromise. For those of you who have sat below on a 23, it BARELY has sitting headroom under the side deck. I think the best we could do in a 16 would be to make it like the 17, where you have sitting headroom if you don't care about banging the back of your head against the side of the house. Some of you liked the quarter berth type interior, which can give good sitting headroom, but I've heard praises about the 15 interior as opposed to the Compac 16. I don't remember ever crawling into a comPac berth, but I've heard comments that it's difficult to roll over, as is the M-17. A couple of you sent links to X brand boats with a desirable interior and I haven't looked at them yet but I will. The sitting headroom thing is such a compromise; to get height over a quarterberth you usually need to raise the cockpit benches too much, and the geometry of the cockpit is really important, at least to me. Also remember that true sitting headroom is next to impossible without raising the freeboard, because you still have to get under the side decks. That's the reason for a flush deck cabin. like the Cal and Ensenada 20. Ugly, in my mind. Cockpit drainage- We had trouble with the 17, and when I retooled the 17 in about '82 I raised the cockpit 3/4", a nd put in a wetlocker. That helped but didn't really cure the problem. I really don't know how high the sosle is above thbe waterline, but it's several inches, believe it or not. I'm pretty sure that the 15 sole is 3" over the waterline, and it's better than the 17 but not perfect. One thing, the 15 cockpit angles forward and the 17 angles aft. In the 17, the wetlocker helped a lot because about 90% of the water, if pooped, would drain out pretty fast because of the two 2" holes a couple of inches off the sole. Rudder- Yes, I'd plan to do a kickup rudder, similar to the 15. If doing it over, I'd put the same thing on a 17 but i was afraid of losing a rudder now nd then, which happens to some of the competition. Note that Mike Mann 's 15 that he sailed to HI had a slightly shortened 17 rudder. The rig- Years ago I helped sail a Freedom 40 and the next smaller- I think a 34- from Newport to King Harbor, which is about 30 miles or so, mostly upwind. The gal that saialed with me was far more experienced than me on that type of boat, but upwind we just couldn't get the boat moving. We over sheeted, undersheeted, but nothing worked and we finally gave up and mixed a drink. Towards the last, when we eased off to a close reach the boat finally came alive and boomed right along. I think nothing is as effective as a good old Marconi sloop rig; a main and a jib. Without things like rotating masts and wing masts, nothing goes upwind like a sloop rig. Gaff rigs are kind of neat, an d if Doug Kelch lived around here you can bet that I'd be trying to weasel myself a ride. Same with cat ketches, but I want my boat to go well upwind and I'm willing to stumble over lots of wire and turnbuckles. Offset Centerboard- Hmmm. Getting the trunk out from under the cockpit sounds great, but how much would it slow the boat down? It's a given that it would, but how much? For years, whenm I lived in Newport Beach, I sailed Sabots everyh Wed nite at ou club. The sabot, as sailed in S CA, has a leeboard. We sailed the boat flat on the starboard tack and heeled over on port. The sabot was really a terrible little boat (an 8' pram) but was great fun to race because everybody had the same problem. Another thing, we made our little dinghies both ways; either a leeboard or a daggerboard. The daggerboard boats would KILL the leeboard boats upwind. I wonder if the main reason is that the turbulence between the leeboard and the side of the boat did something weird. I'd really be afraid that something like that would happen between the CB and the keel. In the new boat I'm lean ing towards a heavier, more efficient centerboard, more like te original 17's and yes, it would need a winch but yes, it would go faster upwind. Compression Post- I'd opt for no post, like the 15. It would take some serious stiffening, probably with carbon fiber, but could be done. I've done lots of work with carbon in 20 lb racing canoes and kayaks (see huki.com) and have it wired. I hate weight aloft because it's anti-ballast, and I'm sure that we could do it with no more weight than a post. Bridge Deck- Bitch, bitch, bitch! A wide bridge deck encroaches on the footroom of the crew, who just might want to sit up against the house, keeping the weight forward. A high bridgedeck does cut down on getting water below, but it makes a longer step to go below. I think the 15 is pretty well thought out in this regard. Just enough of a deck to make a place for the mainsheet cleat an d a cleat for the CB. Perspective of size- Remember that this project is probably a 16. A 16 would make a roomier and better performing 15. An 18 or 19 would make for a roomier and better performing 17, but it's not enough more room to allow a settee. Years ago I did some serious drawing on a 20, which barely would allow for a settee. It was so long ago that Lyle spent some time with me looking over my shoulder before he started loosing his vision. I'm not even sure that I still have those drawings; if I do they're in a box somewhere in the shop. My personal preference of these boats might be the 18 or 19, just because it would go faster and make it easier to win races! Any more suggestions or comments, keep them coming! jerry

2 1

Re: M_Boats: Bolt Rope and Loose Foot
by Larry E Yake 23 May '09

23 May '09

I run a bolt rope and loose foot on CornDog. Great sail! Larry

1 0

Re: M_Boats: mast configuration
by bownez＠juno.com 23 May '09

23 May '09

GO wrote: 100% mainsail luff engagement - bolt ropes rule! Another boltroper and d*mn proud of it! I'm with you Gary! And now the next discussion, should the mainsail be loose footed? Bones ____________________________________________________________ Criminal Lawyers - Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTOVoKYq8Q7XFNKGsVvSgLLMR5…

2 1

Bolt Rope and Loose Foot
by John and DesAnne Hippe 23 May '09

23 May '09

Hello All, Last year I purchased a new suit of sails. For the Main I switched from slugs to a bolt rope and went loose footed. I love this configuration! I find raising and lowering the Main is faster and easier with the bolt rope. It does not hang up like the slugs did. For reefing, I simply lower the sail allowing the bolt rope to come out of the slot as needed so that I can reef. With the loose foot it is a lot easier to rig the Main on to the boom. Just one slide at the clew. I think I get better sail shape as I can change it much easier. Also when I reef, the reefing lines go between the foot and the boom and not around the boom. I love the new configuration. John M-15 Jester

1 0

Re: M_Boats: mast configuration
by W David Scobie 22 May '09

22 May '09

SWEET PEA's (hull #375, 1983 build) mast has the 'opening' set very low ... 2-3" from the cabin-top. i find it anoying thus far as i must leave ALL slugs in when reefing (so the reef is set a bit 'high' IMO) and i must load the sail and then the boom ... this is a big PITA. the setup adds about 5 minutes to the rigging process. SCRED, my M15, has the opening much higher - at least 18" above the cabin-top. this allowed for putting the boom in place and then loading the main easily and quickly. reefing was also a cleaner operation. it seems at times many boats leave jerry's and bob's shop with 'own custom options'. dave scobie M17 #375 - sweet pea (http://www.m17-375.webs.com) M15 #288 - SCRED (for sale, http://www.freewebs.com/m15-named-scred --- On Thu, 5/21/09, Tom Jenkins <tjenk(a)gte.net> wrote: Hello all, I assume the cutout on the M17 mast slot is designed to accomodate a boltrope main (by both size and location), but I find that it is not perfect for slugs. Among other things, one of my slugs falls right in the cutout on a double reef. Is there a reason why the cutout could not be, say, 8-12" from the mast bottom, assuming most newer boats come with slug-type sails? Thanks, Tom Jenkins

3 2

Re: M_Boats: mast configuration
by GILASAILR＠aol.com 22 May '09

22 May '09

Tom, The reason the cutout should NOT be 8-10 inches above the bottom end (butt) of the mast is - one would be hard pressed to remove the sail from the rig without removing the boom from the mast. This would not facilitate a quick removal of the sail. If you found yourself in need of removing the sail for an emergency - you do not want to additionally remove the boom as one would 'probably' have their hands full at this stage. You may want to look into making a set of mast track gates for the slot. Not a hard job, and many creative solutions have been detailed on the list. A piece of sheet aluminum shaped with a hammer over a large diameter piece of pipe will give you a good contour for a mast gate - it is a pain to secure them but your slugs will stay engaged. Was your 'double reef' cringle put into the sail by the OEM sailmaker or was it added later? You may want to consider lowering the placement of the boom if it is on a slide type gooseneck, lower sailplan wouldn't hurt if you are reefing also helping to keep your 2nd reef tack in the track. GO 'just when I thought I could keep my nose outta........' "where is your 4 foot piece of 3/16 line --I don't see it around your waist!!!" - my US Sailing Instructor Instructors daily comment to one of us in class years ago. Makes a kinda 'Jethro belt', mule tape works for boats our sizes too. Take Care, Have Fun, Go Sailing! In a message dated 5/21/2009 4:45:31 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, tjenk(a)gte.net writes: Hello all, I assume the cutout on the M17 mast slot is designed to accommodate a boltrope main (by both size and location), but I find that it is not perfect for slugs. Among other things, one of my slugs falls right in the cutout on a double reef. Is there a reason why the cutout could not be, say, 8-12" from the mast bottom, assuming most newer boats come with slug-type sails? Thanks, Tom Jenkins _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet! **************Huge savings on HDTVs from Dell.com! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221836042x1201399880/aol?redir=htt… t%2Fclk%3B215073686%3B37034322%3Bb)

2 1

Paging Connie Benneck
by Robert O. Hess 21 May '09

21 May '09

Hi all, I live in the LA area and have decided to buy a M15 as my first sailboat. It's really the only boat of this size that I find seaworthy enough for longer trips out to the islands. I am sure you agree :-) My problem right now is that I am not sure whether my 2004 VW Passat 1.8 Turbo will make a proper towing vehicle at the launch ramp. While the car is rated - at least in Germany - for 650kg (ca. 1400 lbs) of trailer weight, the car has only front wheel drive and, even without a trailer, is not easy to start smoothly on a steep - dry - incline, due to the turbo charger and also the manual transmission. Several knowledgeable M sailors have also recommended against using the Passsat as a towing vehicle, basically for these reasons. Soooo, I am trying to track down Connie Benneck of this site, who apparently tows or towed a M15 with a VW GTI 1.8T, a smaller and lighter version of the Passat. Specifically, I want to ask her what her experience is when pulling the trailer out of the water on a wet ramp. Do the car's front wheels get a good grip? Does she ever slide backwards? How steep is the ramp she is using? And so on. If you are on this list, Connie, I'd greatly appreciate your feedback. If not, maybe someone else who knows how to get in touch with Connie could forward this mail to her. My hope is that this list is small enough to make this work somehow. Many thanks for your help in advance! Robert Hess (unfortunately no relation to Lyle Hess :-( ) P.S. I am reading Robert Manry's "Tinkerbelle" right now and am seriously wonder whether the Montgomery line of boat was at least in part insprired by Manry's boat. Anyone know?

5 7