Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Thanked 248 Times in 198 Posts
Rep Power: 10
One of the nice things about the 1104 was that they did not have the deathroll, excitation rolling issue that was associated with the more typical IOR typeforms. The 1104 did not have the dramatically pinched ends, low ballast ratio, or the small-mainsail/big jib sailplan that is normally associated with the protypical IOR typeform.
Farr's literature of the era suggested that the success of the 1104 in world class racing lead to the 1978 change to the IOR rule. In my opinion it was that change to the rule that ultimately lead to the extremes in low ballast stability and high form stability that contributed to the 1979 Fastnet Disaster. Up until that change in the rule, you could still race competitively under the IOR with non-IOR typeforms such the J-36 and Farr 1104. The 1104 has a 40% ballast ratio contained in deep lead fin. The revised IOR specifically targeted boats with high stability and fractional rigs.
There is a lot of good about the way these boats were built. They had nicely framed, non-cored hulls. They employed minimal liners, and so are likely to be structurally sound candidates for restoration.
There were a couple 1104's here in Annapolis and when I was looking for my boat I spoke to a couple fellows who had raced on them for years. They spoke glowingly about these boats in all conditions. My only concern is that some of the boats were retrofitted with spagetti spars, but the original design was a robust fractional rig.