Association Forum - Compromise at what cost?

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

Catalina 250 Specific Forum

Compromise at what cost?

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 2

krconway
Deckhand

Member Avatar

USA
12 Posts

Initially Posted - 04/22/2003 : 23:39:43

We all understand every boat is a compromise. I have had the pleasure to own a 250 WK for the last year. What I loved, huge cockpit, spacious interior. What I didn't love, very tender with a low ballast ratio and lots of freeboard. What I could do, sail in light winds, what I didn't want to do, get caught in a serious blow with an overpowered sailplan. What I learned from with help from my wife, put a reef in at the slip and keep the main sheet free of incumberance. Although I could sail when others sat wishing for the breeze I got tired of heeling at 35+ degrees in anything over 17 MPH gusts while boats with greater ballast ratios shrugged it off. In other words, reef early or find a way to add about 1000lbs ballast to this boayt in anything over 16 knots.

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 04/23/2003 : 00:43:56

Yes, I know what you mean. My last boat was light and very tender. When the wind kicked up, it was some work to get her to point to weather. In puffs, I had to keep the mainsheet in hand, sometimes not even cleating it, so I could ease the main in a second to keep from heeling excessively.

Like you said, "every boat is a compromise". Some boats perform better in light winds, while others prefer a good breeze. In my sailing area the winds are predominantly in the 5-15mph range. Days with little-to-no wind are somewhat rare. So in my waters, it pays to have a less tender boat with good to-weather performance. Fortunately, that is the boat I have now, a boat that likes wind and yawns at puffs, but the boat before sure kept things lively!

<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>Don Lucier<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b2d904b3127cce9f7cd9ffdf1d0000003010" border=0>
North Star SR/FK

Edited by - dlucier on 04/23/2003 00:46:21

Edited by - on

Rick Evans
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
38 Posts

Response Posted - 04/23/2003 : 17:03:34

I'm not sure I agree that the 250 WK is all that tender. I guess the question is compared to what? I've sailed in plenty of other boats which seemed more prone to healing than the 250. Also, many, if not most boats will require a reef when the wind heads north of 16 to 17 knots. I've sailed some 50 footers and a reef was clearly required at 20 knots and above. If you want to make reefing easier, you can rig it so you don't do it at the slip. You can attach a block at the base of the mast and run your reefing line aft through one of the clutches. When the wind kicks up, you can lower the main a couple feet while pulling in your reefing line. The whole process can literally be done in under 30 seconds. If you've got a furling jib, you can reduce sail in no time. With the additional freeboard, you can always add more weight to your wing keel. I've known some who have put on a few hundred pounds to stiffen her up. Good luck.

Edited by - on

cathluk
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
513 Posts

Response Posted - 04/23/2003 : 18:52:14

I agree w/ Rick. The C250wk requires easly reefing & I would recommend a second reef if you don't already have one for those days its really blowing a stink. I've found my boat to sail faster if you don't let the heel get past 15 degrees. With a single reef it still has a powerful sailplan (I have the tall rig - don't know about the regular rig).

The high freeboard can cause come problems - we ride in a semicircle sometimes at anchor & we have had some "exciting" <img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle> docking experiences.

Where do you sail?

Cathy
"Blown Away"
'97 C250WK #253

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/23/2003 : 20:33:26

The extra amount of reefing initially seems awkward... but then as it sinks in at what conditions its required...it becomes as matter of fact as shifting a car or truck into a lower gear when climbing a hill.

Once the routine of setting and shaking out a reef seems natural to the scheme of the boat... it all falls into place. Reefing is and always has been a matter of fact part of sail management.

Personally, I think too much is made of the concern for going onto the coach roof to perform sail management chores. I'm not wanting to sound cavalier or carefree... but the handing of the sail from on top the cabin is not that bad of a deal. Maybe we ought to rememeber those sailors of yesteryear where so much of the sail work was aloft...or forward on the sprit.

Maybe its that we've allowed ourselves to get too far outa shape either physically or mentally to handle the duties that shouldn't be that challenging and are a normal part of sailing discipline.

Maybe we've become too lazy with all the conveniences... and are frustrated that reefing requires a nominal amount of effort.

Maybe we're simply annoyed by the interruption of ease for which we have grown so accustomed.

Maybe were doing what what we've learned to do so well...casting the blame elsewhere for not reefing when we should when little effort is required. Yes... it does take mustering some courage to overcome a boat on the verge of being out of control... because of our silly lapse of discipline.

Before taking me on... I will say that the c250 hasn't exactly been reef friendly... so maybe we can blame the boat a little... but only once. After that, the problems of reefing should have been made right.

The c250 doesn't come rigged for good reefing. Early hull numbers only had one reef point in the sail. None have had both reef points set up. And, the single line factory reefing setup is sad.

So...unless reefing has become easy and matter of fact... it could be that more attention is needed to either the boats setup... or ones mental or physical conditioning.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 04/24/2003 : 10:55:41

I'll second Arlyn, in fact I'll kick it up a notch and take the heat for it.
I grew up as "the foredeck kid". The old man would wait too long to take the genny down, and then send me up there to do it. Up and down in 10+ footers, salt showers, hanked on jib/genoa, (sixties......the furling jib hadn't even been invented yet) SCREW SHACKLES, with a key with lanyard tied around my puny little midriff, and oh boy if you lost the pin or let the sail get in the water......A 90 pound kid stuffing a 150 with a 40+ foot luff into it's bag......

I loved every minute of it......

So, spend some quality dock time setting up your gear the way you like it, without spending too many BU's, a little line, a small block here, a shackle there, and then get in the groove and enjoy it.
(Or, to put it more succinctly, shut up and sail )

Oscar <img src=icon_smile_blackeye.gif border=0 align=middle>
<img src="http://www.woodenshoemusic.com/Images/familypics/LKforumshot.jpg" border=0>
Lady Kay 250 WB #618
In the driveway in Behtlehem, PA ready to go anytime.

Edited by - Oscar on 04/24/2003 10:57:09

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3321 Posts

Response Posted - 04/24/2003 : 16:25:07

I hope I don't offend my friends Steve, Rick & Bren, but I believe that any boat that requires reefing in 10 knots is WAY too tender. I can run "This Side Up" in 15 - 18 knots with a full 155% and a full main. I've sailed in 50 knot squalls in the Windward Islands and in a tropical storm in the Gulf of Mexico, but was never so apprehensive as on a C250 in 10 knots before we reefed...
Cathy - when you reef your tall rig you have the same size sail plan as a standard rig (assuming the C250 is proportionate to the C25).
Derek

<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3dc30b3127cce942c608d6f1e0000001010" border=0>
TRFK#2262"This Side Up"

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 04/24/2003 : 19:46:16

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I can run "This Side Up" in 15 - 18 knots with a full 155% and a full main.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

That's what I like about the C25 and it's 1,900lb fin keel, I've only reefed for the practice.

<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>Don Lucier<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b2d904b3127cce9f7cd9ffdf1d0000003010" border=0>
North Star SR/FK

Edited by - on

ssteakley
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
467 Posts

Response Posted - 04/24/2003 : 21:44:53

Back in Feburary our HCYC had a race..just before we left the docks for the race, the winds kicked up to about 20mph...I put in a second reef and just a bit of jib and we were ready to go ....everyboby else headed for the Marina...we stayed out and sailed around for about an hour just to demonstrate our ability to sail in the conditions...the other boats ranged from a 22' Starwind to a 32' Beneteau. That second reefing point is very valuable,
Steve

<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3dc32b3127cce94d57c8cff3b0000001010" border=0> Moon Chaser #385WK <img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/forum/forum1.gif" border=0>

Edited by - on

Rick Evans
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
38 Posts

Response Posted - 04/24/2003 : 22:53:22

Once again we get back to the 25 -vs- 250 debate. The 25 does have a heavier keel but I'm still not convinced its more stiff. The 250WK has almost 1,000 lbs of ballast which is 8 inches deeper than the 25 WK. The displacement of the 250 is virtually identical to any 25. Derek, why in the world 10 knots of wind had you heeling too much has me puzzled. That's absolutely perfect for the 250. I'll grant you that I won't sail without a reef or the jib partially furled above 15 knots but I'm willing to bet the 25 will only handle a few more knots of wind before a reef is called for. Regard;ess, what in the world does it matter. If I have to reef in somewhat earlier than another boat, I'll still sail just as fast. I went flying by some fellow who was struggling with his full sail plan when I was reefed in proving that the bottom line was speed rather than who was more manly by having all the sails out. When Chichester launched his Gypsy Moth for his first transatlantic singlehanded race, the first words out of his mouth were "My God, it's a rocker." (referring to the tender nature of the craft). He later sailed that same tender boat through the Southern ocean on his singlehanded circumnavigation.

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2003 : 00:04:25

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Once again we get back to the 25 -vs- 250 debate.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I don't think it's the "25 vs 250" debate that is going on here. The original poster brought up the issue of his boats tenderness and reefing needs as compared to less tender boats who "shrugged it off".

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The 25 does have a heavier keel but I'm still not convinced its more stiff. The 250WK has almost 1,000 lbs of ballast which is 8 inches deeper than the 25 WK. The displacement of the 250 is virtually identical to any 25.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Yes, the displacement of the C25 FK is only about 400lbs heavier than a C250WK, but the C25 fin has about 900lbs more ballast than the C250WK and it is deeper. Now, to be fair I haven't sailed a C250, but I have to believe that this extra 900lbs of deeper ballast has to make the C25 somewhat stiffer.

<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>Don Lucier<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b2d904b3127cce9f7cd9ffdf1d0000003010" border=0>
North Star SR/FK

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2003 : 00:35:01

Part of the issue here is the Main... The c250 has a full batten main with a significant roach... The main is far more powerful on the C250 than is the main on the C25. So, its very logical that reefing the main is a bigger deal on the C250 than the C25. I'm wondering if skippers of the two boats were poled...the C25 bunch would say that their first depowering is done by furling the headsail ... where at least this C250 owner says that his first depowering is done on the main.

The c25 was designed during a time when overlapping jibs were believed neccessary to work the slot. So they were designed for a large genoa and a small main.

Later the slot theory evolved to a conception that it was really the way in which the two sails could work together...and that overlapping wasn't the deal. Infact...having two sails wasn't even necessary.

The other part of the deal is the ballast ratio. Looking at the numbers...the c250 ballast ratio just isn't what the c25 is... and wasn't designed to be... To get the C25 moving in light air...it had to have a tall rig. You notice that Derek runs a tall rig... To go faster in light air... he needed a rig with less ballast ratio.

The trade off for the lower ballast ratio...is that it has to be reefed earlier and is considered more tender because it heels more for a given amount of wind ... Derek's tall rig would have to be reefed before a similar keeled standard rig and therefore his tall rig is more tender than a standard rig. No mystery or surpize to that.

That the two boats heel differently... is really inconsequential...what is important is that each is sailed within the character of that particular boat.

We have a report...that seems unexplainable to some...that during the '97 Nationals, that the c250s starting five minutes after the c25's which were according to the reporter... equipped with race quality sails, while some of the c250s were only equiped with stock 110's, quickly reeled in the C25s during light air racing.

Seems to me...the answer is no mystery...the C250 was designed with a sail plan that could continue to provide sailing enjoyment in light air... and that the trade off for that...(remember, there are always trade offs) is a need to reef earlier. Quite frankly...that seems like a pretty good trade off to me... not minding reefing... its not that hard to do with a proper settup.

Steve said it well...I put in a double reef and was out there having fun. And Don said it equally as well... that he likes not having to reef. Both are happy. Win Win <img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2003 : 09:07:38

>where at least this C250 owner says that his first depowering is done on the main.<

I'll second that.
Furthermore, what's wrong with a girl that can display a little tenderness? <img src=icon_smile_kisses.gif border=0 align=middle>

Oscar
<img src="http://www.woodenshoemusic.com/Images/familypics/LKforumshot.jpg" border=0>
Lady Kay 250 WB #618
In the driveway in Behtlehem, PA ready to go anytime.

Edited by - Oscar on 04/25/2003 09:08:31

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3321 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2003 : 11:46:34

Arlyn - that's a pretty good explanation. I don't know about the other C25's, but I have a large roach on the main (which helps make it so fast in light air) but, like the C250, also makes it the first sail to be reefed.
In the abandoned race of which Steve speaks, it should be noted that he was the only boat capable of both furling the jib AND double-reefing the main. Had this been possible on the Beneteau I was helming, we would have stayed out too! <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
I think that part of our differences of opinion is that we are talking about two 25' widely disparate models that both happen to be called Catalina...Personally, I enjoy the stability and forgiveness of the C25 - especially the forgiveness!
Derek

<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3dc30b3127cce942c608d6f1e0000001010" border=0>
TRFK#2262"This Side Up"

Edited by - on

dlucier
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Virgin Islands (United Kingdom)
7583 Posts

Response Posted - 04/25/2003 : 20:08:02

Amen!

<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>Don Lucier<img src="http://www.catalina25-250.org/c25sm.gif" border=0>
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b2d904b3127cce9f7cd9ffdf1d0000003010" border=0>
North Star SR/FK

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2003 : 11:16:17

Derek and Don...your right about some need for forgivness... and initially the C250 didn't have enough and got an appropriate bad rap.

Catalina was caught off guard with inadequate rudder. It would be very intersting to know how that happened but they weren't the only ones. Santana as well as of course Macs had the same problem. (I'm of course refering to water ballast boats which was the intitial design of the c250).

To my knowledge, Catalina is the only one who didn't leave owners in the lurch...they provided two further attempts to provide a rudder that works well.

The high lift rudder does solve most of the rounding up problems and therefore provides a good bit of forgivness to a more tender ballast ratio on a hull form designed for interior ballast.

Relating to this issue...is that the hull form of the c250 also includes greater freeboard... It can be heeled to 40 degrees and never comes close to spilling water over the rail. The initial problem...was that the rounding up started at about 20 degrees which was far inadequate forgivness. A high lift rudder along with properly balance has doubled that to 40 degrees which is not a bad number. Figuring most sailing takes place 20 deg or less, this provides 20 degrees of heel range to react to puffs and headers and thus provides a fair forgivness range. Beyond 40, its probably a good thing the boat does round up... and in a sense, the boat forgives itself at the cost of course of momentarily being out of control.

Her past sins of course are that she has scared many crew by going out of control at 20 degrees. Such perceptions live a long time... An early owner who gave up on the boat and sold it... might have no knowledge for example that a newer high lift rudder solved the out of control problems and will continue to express his perceptions that were accurate and real.

This struggle was made worse by Catalina... They in fact fixed the forgivness problem by releasing the 2nd generation high lift rudder. But, in doing so they created two other problems. One, the first rudder was balanced, and they produced the 2nd unbalanced (a mystery to me) which resulted in torque problems which clouded the control fix because it require such arm strength to hold the boat from rounding up. Two, they made the rudder a deep rudder and continued to use the deep rudder after beginning production of the wing which had less draft than the rudder.

Another Catalina problem played into this as well... The C250 offered a beaching rudder which was quite popular and made the long rudder issue mute as the rudder would swing back and forgive an accidental grounding. A problem existed however in the hold down design... which after a little wear, allowed the rudder to position raked aft slightly which greatly affected torque problems which were not good to start with. This condition left my boat in such sad shape that it was very difficult to recover from a rudder lock turn... the auto pilot was useless, unable to cope with the torque.

All in all...what I'm really trying to say here is that the C250 was a new design... and as always, they are subject to problems which need ironed out. The same was true for the C25's. They had inadequate stem fittings, poor spreader sockets, leaking window frames, swing keel struggles, etc. The comments are not missed that when someone is searching for a C25... they often limit their search to a late model which doesn't incurr many of the design problems of earlier hull numbers.

An interesting point...is that a '95 or '96 C250 has no significant shortcomings compared to an eight year later model... this do to the ability to easily change the rudder and that Catalina continues to offer those changes at a modest price to subsequent owners. This says a great deal about Catalina.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Oscar
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2030 Posts

Response Posted - 04/26/2003 : 22:45:28

Good info Arlyn. Makes you wonder though, to what extent products are tested before release. Seems just like the software industry...throw a beta out there, see what happens.
When they thought they were ready to turn them loose, Catalina could have taken two or three, put life rafts, sat phones and a few experienced somewhat adventurous sailors on them , and send them to Hawaii........most of the gripes would have been discovered on that trip.

Oscar
<img src="http://www.woodenshoemusic.com/Images/familypics/LKforumshot.jpg" border=0>
Lady Kay 250 WB #618
In the driveway in Behtlehem, PA ready to go anytime.

Edited by - on

Tray
Navigator

Members Avatar

Namibia
224 Posts

Response Posted - 04/27/2003 : 09:00:53

Arlyn,

You've got me wondering now if I have the 3rd gen rudder. I have a 2001 WB #554 which I thought had that rudder. But the second we get past a 20 degree heel, she rounds up out of control. I have attributed that to the flat hull shape.

Can you tell from this picture if I have the 3rd gen?
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3da06b3127cce96af45ce0d3e0000001610" border=0>

Thanks.

Tray
C-250WB #554
"Weeny Bean"
<img src="http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3da37b3127cce963eb621ece90000001010" border=0>

Edited by - Tray on 04/27/2003 09:19:18

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/27/2003 : 21:29:08

Tray... it looks like you have the 3rd generation rudder.

btw... I've now got enough time on my 3rd generation to know that it doesn't have the lift the 2nd does. This came as no suprize... as Gerry Douglas confessed to me as he was developing the 3rd...that it wouldn't while heeling any significant amount. The reduction of 17 inches leaves that understood.

This was one reason I was in no hurry to get the 3rd... and really did so only because the 2nd has gel coat cracks in the area under the kick up head and I didn't want to lose out on the at cost deal and wanted to have the 3rd for a spare if the 2nd should break.

I continue to beleive... if someone has the 2nd generation kickup... by performing the simple mods to rake it forward... it is the better way to go. It has more lift, can be reasonably balanced fairly easy and offers forgivness if grounding. The one disadvantage...it can't be left mounted while trailering on the water ballast boat.

With the 3rd, the combination of the balanced design and perhaps the steering linkage mods I made to change the turn ratio of the wheel... completely eliminates helm torque even when the rudder is stalling and being drug sideways. I'm thinking the rudder may be slightly over balanced...but would have to sail a tillered boat to say that for sure.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/28/2003 : 07:42:51

Good idea Oscar...

It would be interesting to know what testing takes place with a new design. No idea of what goes on up front of their production but after production starts... they lean heavily on owners to tell them what is not working... and they do listen and make adjustments.

Most new designs are given over to evaluation by Cruising World etc. primarily as a way to introduce a new line and hopefully get good comments. Sometimes these evaluations produce some good information. One such on the C250 very early on questioned a possible "lead" shortcoming on the c250. I think Mark Melchoir has that article on his Central Texas Sailor site... some good reading.

The gist of it... was that the testing sailor saw enough to be concerned that the "lead" was inadequate but that he didn't have the boat long enough to sail in heavy enough wind to be sure.

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

cathluk
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
513 Posts

Response Posted - 04/28/2003 : 08:03:56

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
But the second we get past a 20 degree heel, she rounds up out of control. I have attributed that to the flat hull shape.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

We had trouble rounding up on our '97 which we improved by shifting weight forward. We found that w/ lots of weight aft & less forward the boat was sliding on its flat hull shape aft. We added bags of playground sand under the v-berth & it greatly relieved the rounding up problem. I think some later models have the water tank up front which should have the same effect.

Cathy
"Blown Away"
'97 C250WK #253

Edited by - on

arlingva
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
116 Posts

Response Posted - 04/29/2003 : 00:07:20

Cathy,

Where is your water tank? My 2002 is under the v berth.

Bill Swanson, C 250 # 614

Bill Swanson
C250WK #614

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/29/2003 : 07:43:13

Cathy's hull number 253 is 29 boats newer than mine...and mine is a '96 ordered in '95 and taken delivery in Jan of '96.

I was thinking...that the water tank changed during '97 or '98 from a five gallon plastic jug in the galley cabinet to a tank in the V berth.

Many of us upgraded and removed the galley jug and installed two Todd 9 gal tanks in the V berth for 18 gal of fresh water.

For information and interest, other changes around this time were;

A step in the coaming for boarding
Propane locker
Wing Keel was released
Mast raising system went from gin pole to trailer system

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

cathluk
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
513 Posts

Response Posted - 04/29/2003 : 08:10:24

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Cathy,

Where is your water tank? My 2002 is under the v berth.

Bill Swanson, C 250 # 614

Bill Swanson
C250WK #614
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

My water tank is an approximately 15 GL tank under the starboard setee next to the galley.

Other info about my '97-

I own a wing keel although my manual seems to be for the water ballast.

I have a tall rig & 110 jib. My understanding is that originally wing keel models had a 150 Genoa, but that proved to much for a tall rig wing keel. That's second hand from the previous owner so I'm not sure if that's correct or not.

My trailer (which I sold) did NOT have the mast raising system.

It's interesting to see the various modifications over the years even on a model so new. I wonder if Catalina's kept track?

Cathy
"Blown Away"
'97 C250WK #253

Edited by - CATHLUK on 04/29/2003 08:15:28

Edited by - on

Arlyn Stewart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
2980 Posts

Response Posted - 04/29/2003 : 11:27:25

Cathy.... I'm curious if your shrouds terminated at the deck lip or the cabin top?

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<img src="http://www.stewartfam.net/arlyn/rr.jpg" border=0>
N/E Texas and Great Lakes

[url="http://www.cox-internet.com/arlynstewart/"]Arlyn's C250 Mods n Cruisin Stories[/url]

Edited by - on

cathluk
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
513 Posts

Response Posted - 04/30/2003 : 14:36:59

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Cathy.... I'm curious if your shrouds terminated at the deck lip or the cabin top?

Arlyn C-250 W/B #224
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Cabin top.

Cathy
"Blown Away"
'97 C250WK #253

Edited by - on

Page: of 2

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.