Whaddya folks think about Kettenburgs? - Page 2 - SailNet Community
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #11 of 21 Old 08-26-2007 Thread Starter
On the hard
 
CharlieCobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bellingham, WA.
Posts: 3,503
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
She's fairly up to date with radar, autopilot, depth sounder, GPS. All of it is Raymarine on a Seatalk network except the Furuno, something I need to study. The SS rigging is one year old as is the hull paint since being taken to bare wood in 2006. I spent 7 hrs on her yesterday climbing in every nook and cranny checking for issues. I found 5 ribs with minor cracks that'll need to be sistered but not much else. There's no leaks in the house and the bilges had an inch of water in them right below the bilge pump. The batteries were off so the pump wasn't active. Just a hint of diesel when ya first open the boat which disappears rapidly. Nothing but the smell of fine old wood.
CharlieCobra is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 21 Old 08-26-2007
Moderator
 
Jeff_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,842
Thanks: 5
Thanked 138 Times in 111 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
"Jeff, these don't have fin keels, they have full keels with a cutaway forfoot and skeg hung rudder. They point with the best and have one more races than many designs out there. I think you confused the K's with something else. Go to http://www.kettenburgboats.com and check it out."

With all due respect, I know the lines of a Kettenberg quite well. While there is a tendancy these days to call any boat with an attached rudder a "full keeled" boat, there is no resemblance between the keel on the Kettenburg and a full keel. In the days when the Kettenburg was designed (and I began sailing) a fin keel was any keel whose bottom was less than 50% of the length of the boat (sometimes quoted as 50% of the horizontal length of the sailplan) whether or not the boat had an attached rudder or not.

Look at the profile of the Kettenberg 38,(visualizing it without its rudder)
http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listi...ame=2D+Drawing

Or the Kettenburg 46 for that matter:
http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listi...fied+full+keel

and compare it to the Cal 40.
http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listi...o_name=Photo+6

You will see that the Cal 40, which no one denies is a fin keel, actually has a longer horizontal proportion than the Kettenburg. If you read Lapworth's contemporary descriptions of why he went to a spade rudder on the Cal 40, it was because he had been racing fin keeled/attached rudder boats like the Kettenburg and they were so foul handling that he sought a better underbody design that would improve handling and tracking. The Cal 40 was a revolation compared to these fin keeled/attached rudder boat (as they were called at the time that they were designed) because these early fin keeled spade rudder boats actually tracked better and were much easier to steer by virtue of having a much greater longitundinal monent of interia to their lateral plane than the boats with attached rudders.

In terms of hull sections the Kettenburgs had very similar cross sections as well, with comparatively firm bilges for that era, with a comparatively large fillet whether the keel joins the hull.

So while it is popular to rewrite history and deny that these are fin keels and these days to go so far as to call them full keels, that whatever you may chose to call them, it does not change the fact that these extremely short length keels/ with attached rudder boats are a real bear to sail in light conditions and at the heavier end of the wind spectrum. Add in the full ends and short waterline you end up with a boat that will not hold a course without a lot of tending and which is hard on a crew. There is real virtues to a well designed full keel, but calling a boat like this a full keel, even though it lacks all of the virtues of a full keel, is insulting to real full keels.

Respectfully,
Jeff

Last edited by Jeff_H; 08-26-2007 at 02:37 PM.
Jeff_H is online now  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #13 of 21 Old 08-27-2007 Thread Starter
On the hard
 
CharlieCobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bellingham, WA.
Posts: 3,503
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
Wow Jeff, there must be a whole foot of difference in horizontal length between the Cal 40 and K-46 keels if ya take into account to cut 6' off the K-46's bow for comparison. While I agree the spade rudder is better for handling I seem to recall a certain poster here espousing the virtues of a skeg hung rudder with regards to strength and safety. I wonder who that was....

Tell ya what, bring your Cal 40 and I'll bring my K-46 and we'll see who kicks who's ass around the cans, heavy or light. I'll bring a case of good IPA for later.

Last edited by CharlieCobra; 08-27-2007 at 02:07 PM.
CharlieCobra is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #14 of 21 Old 08-27-2007
Telstar 28
 
sailingdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 43,290
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
Rep Power: 14
         
Charlie-

Don't confuse keel-hung rudders with skeg-hung rudders. Skegs are an underwater appendage that is separate from the keel and having the rudder further aft, hanging off of a skeg will drastically improve the handling of the boat, especially when compared to the rudders on the Kettenburgs, which are hung off a relatively short fin keel and almost under the center of the boat.

The reason transon hung spade rudders work so well is that they are so far aft that they have far more effect on the steering of the boat than the rudders on the Kettenburgs ever could. Given that the rudders on the Kettenburgs are also keel-hung, it is very likely that they will suffer from a heavy helm than a more balanced spade rudder would.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieCobra View Post
Wow Jeff, there must be a whole foot of difference in horizontal length between the Cal 40 and K-46 keels if ya take into account to cut 6' off the K-46's bow for comparison. While I agree the spade rudder is better for handling I seem to recall a certain poster here espousing the virtues of a skeg hung rudder with regards to strength and safety. I wonder who that was....

Tell ya what, bring your Cal 40 and I'll bring my K-46 and we'll see who kicks who's ass around the cans, heavy or light. I'll bring a case of good IPA for later.

Sailingdog

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Telstar 28
New England

You know what the first rule of sailing is? ...Love. You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but you take
a boat to the sea you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of the worlds. Love keeps
her going when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurting 'fore she keens. Makes her a home.

—Cpt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity (edited)

If you're new to the Sailnet Forums... please read this
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

Still—DON'T READ THAT POST AGAIN.

Last edited by sailingdog; 08-27-2007 at 02:19 PM.
sailingdog is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #15 of 21 Old 08-27-2007
Moderator
 
Jeff_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,842
Thanks: 5
Thanked 138 Times in 111 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
That is my point, the Kettenburgs proportionately foot less distance (I'll take your word for it) is what makes the Kettenburg a fin keel with attached rudder.

As to the relative speed between the Cal 40 and the Kettenburg 46, you and I don't have to hypthetically repeat history. All you need to do is look at the race results from the mid-1960's when the Cal 40's hit the water. Before the Cal 40 showed up on the scene, boats like the Kettenburgs dominated the race course, but in the first few years that Cal 40's were around, (before further advances were made) the Cal 40's dominated nearly ever major regatta in the country making fin keel/ attached rudder boats (or if you prefer, extremely cut away forefoot and rudder post boats) like the Kettenburgs instantly obsolete as high level race boats. For that matter simply look at PHRF ratings. In So Cal PHRF there are no Kettenburg 46's but there is a Kettenburg 40 which rates 156. Cal 40's rate 114. There is a Kettenburg 50 (which I believe has a skeg hung rudder rather than a keel hung rudder) that rates 114, which would suggest that the Kettenburg 46 probably rates somewhere down around 121. For a boat that is six feet longer giving away 9 seconds a mile does not sound like the 46 is all that fast nor would it beat the Cal 40 around a race course.

Look, I've spent a lot of time on boats like these. They are gorgeous to look at but they are very hard and uncomforable boats to sail, and certainly are slow compared to the boats that followed them.

Respectfully,
Jeff
Jeff_H is online now  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #16 of 21 Old 08-27-2007 Thread Starter
On the hard
 
CharlieCobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bellingham, WA.
Posts: 3,503
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
Actually, the PCC or K-46 rates at 114 to 120 depending on the region, which ain't exactly slow. Six to nine seconds a mile can easily be picked up by a decent crew.
CharlieCobra is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #17 of 21 Old 08-27-2007 Thread Starter
On the hard
 
CharlieCobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bellingham, WA.
Posts: 3,503
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
Oh, BTW, a little excerpt by Bill Lapworth himself about a Kettenburg PCC (K-46) in the 1964 Transpac:

As a side note, it is my impression that the best sailed boat that year got virtually no attention. It was the PCC "Undine", sailed by Norm Dawley. The PCC's have a PHRF rating of 120, as compared with 114 for the Cal-40's. This 1946 Kettenburg "woodie" that was not designed to surf, out sailed all of the Cal-40's, even finishing ahead of Ariana. They ended up 3rd in class "B". The IOR rule was not kind to that sort of design.

Here's the link:

http://www.cal40.com/index.php?pr=History

Regardless, I love the lines of the boats of that era and plan to keep this one in bristol condition. She'll be making the rounds at the wooden/classic shows in the area and competing once again in events like the Swiftsure and maybe the Vic Maui.

Last edited by CharlieCobra; 08-27-2007 at 05:50 PM.
CharlieCobra is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #18 of 21 Old 08-30-2007
Senior Member
 
sailortjk1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Porter, IN
Posts: 4,647
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
Well Charlie,
What is the outcome?
Did you bite the bullet?
(Way too much work/time/money for me,
I would much rather sail a boat than work on a boat)

Courtney is My Hero

If a man is to be obsessed by something, I suppose a boat is as good as anything, perhaps a bit better than most - E.B. White
sailortjk1 is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #19 of 21 Old 08-30-2007
Ne'er Do Well
 
TSteele65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 563
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 9
 
There's a 41' Hinckley Cutter that's been for sale FOREVER in SF. The asking price is down to $69K - it had been as high as $120K. Looks like a gorgeous boat, if you're looking for a classic woody.

http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listi...g_id=1741&url=
TSteele65 is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #20 of 21 Old 08-30-2007 Thread Starter
On the hard
 
CharlieCobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bellingham, WA.
Posts: 3,503
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
   
TSteele65, that's a nice looking boat but it's a bit pricey and not any improvement over the PCC as far as I can tell. I like the Kettenburg's cockpit and fiberglass deck better (there's enough to varnish already) as well as the PCC's v-berth. The PCC is also faster at 120 and you wouldn't believe how much cheaper. I made the offer and am waiting for the response. I'd post a pic but the forum won't let me. I posted them up in my photo album instead. I'll let you guys know if the offer's accepted.
CharlieCobra is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where do the Cheoy Lee Folks Hangout? AA3NK Cheoy Lee 27 11-03-2012 07:45 AM
This is TONIGHT folks, WYC Mardi Gras Party, if you like to attend NewsReader Mass Bay Sailors 0 02-17-2007 10:15 AM
Keowee marina sailing ahead despite FOLKS (The Greenville News) NewsReader News Feeds 0 01-22-2007 06:15 AM
Any Northern Folks ever done this? JohnPen Cruising & Liveaboard Forum 7 10-05-2006 09:32 AM
Double-handed sailing: Different strokes for different folks (Connecticut Post) NewsReader News Feeds 0 07-17-2006 01:15 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome