The ratios and other numbers - can someone enlighten me or point me to a resource?

[arbarnhart]

I don't think so, but it does warrant a closer look just to be sure. I have a cutting diagram of the keel itself (PO had a new one made and gave me the diagram in case it ever needs another). and there is no hole in the keel itself for a through bolt other than the swivel point and the cable eye.

[Jeff_H]

I would suggest that almost all of those number have zero or no bearing on the reality at hand. Newport, and most trailer-sailer builders of that era routinely published displacements that were way low of the actual weight of the boats. These published weights were typically based on pretty hypothetical dry design weights, which made no consideration of actual sailing weights, let alone crew weight. Published sail areas were typically with the stock overlappinbg headsails, and were not with 100% foretriangle as is supposed to be used for SA/D and so your SA/D is probably substantially lower than you think as well. Motion comfort is probably about right for a boat with relatively hard chines and a flat bottom, a high vertical center of gravity and so on. Then there is Capsize Screen Formula, which is mostly a useless formula since it does not include the major factors that control capsize (vertical center of gravity and buoyancy, dampening etc.). That said with the Newports high vertical center of gravity and low ballast ratio they should be in the near disaster zone of 3 or 4.

Having sailed trailerables out in the Atlantic Ocean shoals, it comes down to this, in good weather you should be fine, but when things turn, and they can quickly, you can get very steep, very tall waves, and a boat like this is easily rolled.

I once did an offshore race out of Savannah on a 25 IOR quarter tonner that I owned where we needed to round a mark roughly 5 miles offshore. The weather was predicted to be nice and the race began just that way. As we rounded the mark teh weather turned really nasty, and within 15-20 minutes we were in 10-12 foot seas that were occasionally breaking and threatening to roll us. This was a boat with a 40% ballast ratio and 5' 6" draft. The Newport is a boat with a 23% ballast ratio when dry, and far less loaded.

Jeff

[arbarnhart]

Jeff,

I think you nailed my primary concern - big water. Based on mostly anecdotal evidence, I think it handles wind pretty well in terms of not getting completely knocked all the way over before recovering (if that's what you call depowering and heading up). I have only been in touch with one person who has ever taken one into true blue water and he doesn't recommend it for such. A few others sail off the coast but stay near shore. Oddly, I still have not encountered a roll over story. Maybe there just aren't that many of the boats or most are sailed in protected waters; I don't know.

Again, I don't plan to do blue water. But I wouldn't want to set out on the Beaufort to Lookout run if I thought that a squall that produced big breaking seas would almost guarantee a roll over. If I thought it might but that if I sailed well I would be okay, then I would be okay with choosing to take that slight risk (assuming the chance of bad weather was low to begin with). The run I am talking about is about 7 miles of exposed sailing near shore. If there were big crashing waves, shore wouldn't exactly be a safe haven though. And yes, I know what they call this part of the Atlantic...

"Near disaster zone"? That's a pretty harsh rating. Would it be worthwhile to secure more weight in the bilge or is that just rearranging the deck chairs?

Thanks for the frank assessment.