I know all the general objections against old IOR boats; they are squirelly on a run, they have bad handling characteristics, you need a ton of rail meat, you need an ape to grind home the big gennys.... Etc.
YET, some of them are awful darn purty to look at. The ones that aren't extreme, stupid exaggerations of what a boat should look like.
With that in mind I started comparing the sail area of the foretriangle to the Main and that got me started thinking... (always dangerous
WHAT would you say is a poor ratio of FORETRIANGLE sail area to MAIN sail area?
I went through sailboatdata.com and pulled a bunch of random boats' numbers and made a spreadsheet. I limited this to Marconi rigged sloops only. No cutters, yawls, ketches.
Very interesting to see the results and in some cases the evolution of how things changed w/in a particular brand of boats.
Ration is Foretri./Main IE anything over "1" means the foretriangle has more area than the main and less than "1" means the Main is larger.
Notice especially the difference in the Cal 40 v. the Cal 39 just 10 years later. And the Tartans too. The Albergs, designed late 50's, early 60's, definitely not IOR!
So my question to you, Sailnet fans, is what ratio do you think defines an IOR boat, or more importantly what ratio would you think is too extreme?
What boat would you not want to be the genny grinder on?
|Cal 34 Mk3||284||195||1.456|
|Alerion Exp 28||146||206||0.709|