SailNet Community - Reply to Topic
Thread: Schock Santana questions Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

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.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


  Topic Review (Newest First)
1 Week Ago 03:43 PM
SHNOOL
Re: Schock Santana questions

**** some wavelengths are just plain cows ****

Great history in this thread.
1 Week Ago 03:24 PM
olson34
Re: Schock Santana questions

While this thread is rather old, the information is really interesting, almost "shocking" to coin a pun.
Apropos of whatever, our little YC has two of these rare New York 36's in it.
I have sailed to windward in light air, close hulled to the max with one, and darned if he didn't slowly sail.... over.... me...


Nothin' goes to weather like a good IOR hull form with those balanced water lines.
(Different story off the wind, but the NY-36 seems like a decent boat.)

If shopping, be sure that the interior layout of the NY 36 suites you. The Schock 34 is more conventional.
1 Week Ago 02:05 PM
Faster
Re: Schock Santana questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimsCAL View Post
Great first post truesdell! Interesting info.
Indeed!

Our son raced several seasons on a local Santana 35, and currently owns a Schock 35 and is doing pretty well.

Having spent some time under the boat when it was on the hard, one comment is that the extended bow does not appear truly 'tangential' in transition, but is a fairly distinct turn when viewed from astern. But that's merely a nitpick..

Clearly the modifications were successful, the boat is much faster, rates much faster and seems able to sail to the ratings.
1 Week Ago 11:27 AM
Jeff_H
Re: Schock Santana questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by truesdell View Post
I was part of the whole Santana 35/Schock 35 evolution. I built some of the tooling for the Santana 35 in the factory on S. Greenville St in Santa Ana, CA, and raced extensively with Tom Schock and Steve Schock.

Since most of the NY36 were sold on the east coast (NYYC members), WD did a cost study on how much it cost to truck them out there and decided to build them on the east coast. He bought some land in Bradenton (south of St. Petersburg and Tampa) and yanked his youngest son out of college to run the factory in Florida. They loaded up trailers with NY36 tooling along with a few other boats. Steve is the engineer of the family and a smart, thoughtful guy. WD was clever enough and financially pretty savvy while Tom's forte was customer interaction and sales. They cut Steve loose in Florida with minimal supervision, telling him: "Just sell boats!" Steve liked what he saw in the local MORC fleets and acquired rights to a few Paul Lindenberg designs (Schock's Wavelength series) which were moderately successful, mostly the Wavelength 24.

As orders for the NY36 tapered off, Steve found himself staring at the molds for the Santana 35 and remembering those conversations we all had while sailing. So one day he layed-up a hull, braced it up, then attacked the bow with a chain saw. His bow redesign was very straight-forward: Mock up a more vertical stem, then fair straight back to tangents on the original hull. Really just straight lines from the new stem to where they touched the hull. Did a little selective reinforcement and drew up a masthead rig and a bigger keel with 1,200 more lbs of lead. Added about a foot to the J and lopped off an equal amount from the E. Left out most of the interior bits forward of the main bulkhead.
That is a great write up. I really appreciate hearing the inside story. I am something of a boat history junkie. I wanted to ask you if you can corroborate or correct a few details for me. I had an acquaintance who worked with Paul Lindenberg and then later for Schock. He told me this story.

To begin with, initially the Schocks leased Paul Luindenberg's facility and used Lindenberg's staff to build the NY 36 rather than try to put together an entire plant just to build the NY 36. At some point, Schock bought Lindenberg out. Paul remained at the plant for a period after Schock came into the picture and after Shock absorbed the Lindenberg production line into the Schock line up as a part of the course of the process.

The NY 36's were intended to race under the IOR race and one design keel boats, but quickly after being introduced became obsolte under IOR rule changes and had limited appeal beyond one design since they did not do well under PHRF, especially as some of the newer designs like the J-35/36 and Express 37's were showing up in PHRF fleets. Facing that reality and in need os a more general appeal design it was thought that the Santana 35 was a better platform to get adapted to the PHRF reality.

The version of the story that I heard was that there was a Santana 35 in Florida which was badly damaged. (I think that boat was called something like 'Blew Bayou') and the insurance decision was made to replace the hull and transfer everything else over to the new hull, which was done at the Lindenberg facility, and which left the old hull intact. It was my understanding that this hull was beefed up and cut up to become the plug for the Schock 35.

I also understand that Lindenberg actually drew the lines for the new bow and that a separate plug was made for the redesigned bow and that was grafted onto the hull from the damaged race boat to make the completed mold. Then I had conflicting information about what happened next. One version said that Schock was working with Nelson-Marek at this point and that Nelson-Marek actually drew the new keel, rudder, and rig. The other version said that Paul Lindenberg drew them. One version said the transom was shortened, another sayd it was left untouched.

Can you shed any light on this?

Thank you,
Jeff
1 Week Ago 07:52 AM
JimsCAL
Re: Schock Santana questions

Great first post truesdell! Interesting info.
1 Week Ago 06:05 AM
truesdell
Re: Schock Santana questions

I was part of the whole Santana 35/Schock 35 evolution. I built some of the tooling for the Santana 35 in the factory on S. Greenville St in Santa Ana, CA, and raced extensively with Tom Schock and Steve Schock.

The Santana 35 is a Shad Turner design and is a direct evolution from successful Santana 20 one-design (875 built.)

Right from the beginning the Santana 35 ran into some problems: It came in overweight, it didn't have enough sail area for So California (especially the fractional kites), and it tended to be sticky downwind. So all those negatives and the boat had a punitive IOR rating--way above one-ton. The boat's contemporaries in the IOR arena were the Farr quadruplets (Red Lion, Jenny H, Mr. JumpA, and Smir-Nof-Agen) and compared to those, the Santana 35 had less sail area, shorter LOA and LWL, a blunter entry, but lighter displacement. And it owed one-tonners a "ton" of time. In general it was a fun boat to sail. We loaded one up in Long Beach (more wind than Newport Beach) with college kids with lots of small boat experience and were able to win a series or two. Good times and somewhere I probably have the photos to prove it! The whole time we were racing it we were discussing how to make it faster. It kept coming back to (a) more sail area, (b) longer waterline, and (c) a finer entry. But us youngsters didn't and the money or pull to implement that. Meanwhile, the Santana 35 did quite well in handicap and one-design fleets on San Francisco Bay where the wind is consirably stronger than So. California. However, they did start coming unglued here and there.

The next large project was the Bill Cook design, New York 36, which pretty much directly solved (a), (b), and (c) of the Santana 35, sailed faster, and rated lower.

Since most of the NY36 were sold on the east coast (NYYC members), WD did a cost study on how much it cost to truck them out there and decided to build them on the east coast. He bought some land in Bradenton (south of St. Petersburg and Tampa) and yanked his youngest son out of college to run the factory in Florida. They loaded up trailers with NY36 tooling along with a few other boats. Steve is the engineer of the family and a smart, thoughtful guy. WD was clever enough and financially pretty savvy while Tom's forte was customer interaction and sales. They cut Steve loose in Florida with minimal supervision, telling him: "Just sell boats!" Steve liked what he saw in the local MORC fleets and acquired rights to a few Paul Lindenberg designs (Schock's Wavelength series) which were moderately successful, mostly the Wavelength 24.

As orders for the NY36 tapered off, Steve found himself staring at the molds for the Santana 35 and remembering those conversations we all had while sailing. So one day he layed-up a hull, braced it up, then attacked the bow with a chain saw. His bow redesign was very straight-forward: Mock up a more vertical stem, then fair straight back to tangents on the original hull. Really just straight lines from the new stem to where they touched the hull. Did a little selective reinforcement and drew up a masthead rig and a bigger keel with 1,200 more lbs of lead. Added about a foot to the J and lopped off an equal amount from the E. Left out most of the interior bits forward of the main bulkhead.

The planking artifacts from the plug are the same on both the Santana 35 and the Schock 35 and both need to be massaged out if you want a fast bottom. But that's another story.
05-23-2007 06:02 PM
sailingdog LMPI-

You really shouldn't hijack a dead thread... since your question is basically unrelated, you'd be much better off starting your own thread.
05-23-2007 11:31 AM
LMPi
Shock Santana questions

I bought a shock santana 21, and can't find a trailer to fit her. My adjustable won't adjust enough. I want to build a cradle and insert it in my existing trailer. But I can't find the hull dimensions anywhere on line. Can anyone help me with links or any other way to find out the dimensions I need (without taking her out of the water)?

Thanks.
02-20-2004 04:27 PM
paulk
Schock Santana questions

There seems to be a decent fleet of J/36''s in the Puget Sound area. We sail ours on Long Island Sound (right coast) and have found the price and performance are both great.
02-20-2004 03:53 PM
jkumin
Schock Santana questions

As usual agree with Jeff - and he offered a good list. I raced a Santana 35 in a Swiftsure race (Puget Sound)in the 80''s. It was a dog in the light stuff but a fun boat in a breeze. An acquaintance raced one for years on San Francisco Bay and recall him telling me about bulkheads coming adrift. The Schock 35 is faster all around and better screwed together.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

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