Ballast: Whaddyal Thnk?

[AWKIII]

MacGregor, Catalina and Hunter build water ballasted boats for two primary reasons. It keeps the weight of the boat low for trailering and more importantly, the cost savings are marked.

The downside to water ballast (on these boats) is they tend to be pretty tender and do not perform exceptionally well under sail.

What type of ballast system would you like to see on a new boat?

[AKCoastie]

Dagger board with a weighted bulb at the bottom in addition to water ballast. In order to make it as blue water as possible, it would be nice to have some weight down low on the dagger board as some on the board have done to their :macm:s. Without having to really beef up the dagger board or trunk, you could keep that weight down to 200lbs or so by also using water ballast. Would be like an that could transfer the permanent ballast to a lower center of gravity.

[Rick Westlake]

MacGregor, Catalina and Hunter build water ballasted boats for two primary reasons. It keeps the weight of the boat low for trailering and more importantly, the cost savings are marked.

The downside to water ballast (on these boats) is they tend to be pretty tender and do not perform exceptionally well under sail.

What type of ballast system would you like to see on a new boat?

When I outgrow Bossa Nova, I want lead ballast. And a full keel. And a cutter rig. And enough space belowdecks to live comfortably for the next few years. And a boat strong and sea-kindly enough to cross the oceans.

In other words I want a Cabo Rico 38 or thereabouts ... and I'll live aboard.

Welcome to de islands, mon.

[Hamin' X]

I agree with Rick, a retractable lead bulb keel would be the way to go. Also, need water ballast. I have not done any empirical testing, and have not run the numbers, but I would think that having two water ballast tanks that are interconnected and keeping them as close to the outboard portion of the hull, but below the waterline, would be the way to go. The boat should stiffen up much faster with this configuration, as the angle of heel tries to lift one, or the other tanks clear of the water.

~Rich

[delevi]

Water ballst adds freeboard becuase of the volume of the ballst tanks. It's also not needed if you have a lead keel. Rectractable daggerboard with a lead bulb would be the way to go. If you can, shoot for ballast/displacement ratio no less than 35%

[Rick Westlake]

I agree with Rick....

With me? Or with AK Coastie?

I agree that a lead bulb keel would be an improvement ... or one could use a steel-plate daggerboard like the ones they use on the West Wight Potter. Either way, you'll have to add a robust winch to crank that puppy in and out.

Given that winch, and a strong-enough block atop the daggerboard trunk ... the current could possibly use a steel-plate daggerboard right now. (Since I have a 26X, I'm not the one to try it out.)

My personal notion doesn't run toward an improved Mac 26 ... I want my next boat to be a full-out ocean cruiser, like the Cabo Rico I mentioned (or perhaps a Crealock, a Tayana, maybe an Island Packet) ...

Something big enough to hoist my present aboard for a dinghy.

[Hamin' X]

I agree with Rick....

With me? Or with AK Coastie?

Sorry, my mistake. I meant AK.

~Rich

[ralphk]

As much as I like the waterballast on the 26X, I'd have to vote for the bulb keel as well.

Seems to me that the waterballast scheme works best with the planing powersailor concept.
Hard chines, flat bottom, offer ideal geometry to conceal tanks.
Also 15+ MPH ensures the drain down in a reasonable time, without depending on pumps.

Try soliciting Mac 26C & D owners specifically, as they may have real world experience to share.

I think Roger's concept was to keep the weight so light, that a small 6 cylinder tow vehicle was adequate.
To pull a 32 ft. trailersailer up a slippery ramp, you are looking at full sized V8 truck anyway. (if not diesel supermax or equivilent)
- No engineering calcs offered here, just my opinion.

The Volvo Ocean Race boats (70's) and Vendee Globe (Open 60's), do make great use of water ballast.
However I think we can all agree, that these are in a totally different snack bracket.
Different materials, different performance requirements, and frankly they are designed to withstand 1 or 2 passages, then like Formula 1 cars, then they become obsolete.

I want the keel mechanism/righting assembly to be as reliable after 10 years as on day 1, regardless of whether the thing is used weekly in a slip in Florida, or parked in a barn for 5 years up north.

Art, please invoke the KISS principle!!
Neither you, nor your customers want these coming back for perceived warranty issues!

[ralphk]

Art:

1) Did the original Hobie 33 make use of water ballast?

2) Does the H 33C still have a pulse, or are you retooling?

[Currie]

I'd vote for something that allows people to easily expand and customize a basic design. For instance:

1.) Hull design with two separate water ballast chambers - an inboard set and a somewhat smaller outboard set.
2.) A daggerboard option or a bulb fin-keel option.
3.) Gravity fill of both sets of ballast tanks, but with built in nipples for pumpable ballast on the outer set (optional equipment).
4.) No fixed-keel option

So here are some configurations that users might opt for:

A:) Lightweight - easy handling. Uses a lightweight daggerboard and gravity fill on both sets of ballast tanks.
B:) Performance 1 - Uses a bulb fin/keel with inner (or both) gravity ballast.
C:) Performance 2 - Uses bulb fin/keel and gravity ballast on inner (if desired), and with bi-directional pump option on the outer ballast set, to actively shift weight from one side to the other.

'C' is certainly not for everyone, but it would be nice if the hull was designed to accomodate it, if owners would want that set up.

Cheers,

~Bob

[JustSail]

My next boat will most likely have a lifting bulb keel. Retractable would be nice like the Seaward 26RK, because you can adjust it on the fly. However, it wouldn't be a show-stopper for me if I had to lock it down like a lot of the newer sportboats.

[puggsy]

What about a winged pod on the bottom of the daggerboard...with the bottom hull moulded ex factory to accept the shape. It could be strong and hollow and drain out when trailering. And even when pulled up into its hidey hole in the hull bottom, would retain its water to the same level as the hull is riding...and the bulb being flush with the bottom would not alter the 's 12 inch draft. the manufacturing of the bottom hull would not be so straightforward as it is now and it would encroach on the water ballast compartment,
the 'wings' on the pod would be similar to the bulb that won the 1983 America's Cup in Perth...by Allan Bond,..remember when he unveiled it...

[aya16]

There are so many choices out there in small sail boats, putting another boat out there to me would be a little scary.
Some boats stand out, like the Montgomery's, wind rose, macs, potters. Most of these boats are sold word of mouth without to much advertising. By far the mac in our area stands out and is the most popular of all boats, power and sail.
Just yesterday I went sailing, when I returned to a not so bizzy ramp to haul out, I was greeted with no less than 9 macs, X'S and M'S. It looked like we planned a get together. No other boat brand, power or sail, was represented in those kinds of numbers. The macs success cant be denied, people want a boat that they can take the kids out, have the room for all the items they want to bring and sail for a few hours or motor a good distance to get away from the crowds then sail, In our case we wanted to put some hours on the engine, and sail for awhile. We ended up going out to sea about 15 miles or so, where there was a couple other sail boats( larger ones) That took them all morning to get out there, we were there in less than an hour. It took us three hours to sail back, covered many miles of really decent seas and nice wind. Got out among the wild life and not many other boats.

A new sail boat coming to market has to have something special that people want, I think most people want from a sail boat is the ability to sail new places, not trailer too, so much as just get away from your home port. Im so bored motoring out of MDR, the crowds the kayaks, the same thing everytime. When I get out of the harbor, I dont want to sail the same stretch of water along with all the other sail boats everytime, that are limited to so far out so they can get back to the ramp at a reasonable time. I can shoot over to Catalina have lunch and shoot back in a day (35miles) , and sail for a few hours doing it. No other type sail boat can do that. What people want in a sailboat is options. If I wanted a pure sailboat I would buy a montgomery, potter, nor'sea, windrose, harpoon, or a ranger, something not on a trailer larger a Hunter or an off design, all used not new. Part of Karens and my fun is after washing the mac and putting it away, is to drive around the storage area and look at some of the neat sail boats there, we both have our favorites, But the mac stole our heart. Most of those boat makers are out of biz, and they had a great sail boat to market.
Mike

[baldbaby2000]

I kind of like the retractable wing keel idea meantioned. I was actually thinking of trying something like that on my 26M. I think Richard was also thinking of something like that on his.

I do like the idea of water ballast because of getting rid of all that weight while trailering. I added weight to my daggerboard and can actually sail without water ballast but strangely enough it doesn't seem to be faster without the ballast. It may be because without the water ballast the nose sits too high.

[Love MACs]

I guess I didn't know or understand that water ballast adds to freeboard height. So if that is the case I would vote for a bulb retractable dagger board. Would still want to be able to get into shallow water and make it almost, if not truly beachable. Less freeboard would be a plus, IMHO. But then I am and would be primarily a lake sailor.

Allan