[PalmettoSailor]

You wonder why sailing is a dying sport, a dying activity? It is not because we sailors are not inviting enough novices in. The marine industries stopped catering to the affluent-but-not-rich masses in the late 80s, and they have been headed down ever since. The other thing you can notice about this past weekend's local races - the Down the Bay race and the St. Michaels race - is not too many people are participating any more.

You're lumping a crap load of factors into one post, so much so that I don't know if I agree or disagree with you.

I'm pretty sure I disagree with the assertion that the marine industry stopped catering to the affluent but not rich masses. I'd argue that economics has greatly reduced those that fall into that category, and that the preference for instant gratification have decimated them even more when it comes to recreational boating. I think its far more likely the marine industry and sailboat sector especially have tried to find ways to adapt to that changing environment and have been somewhat successful doing so. You cannot argue that the size of a "starter" sailboat has increased drastically over the past 10-15 years. Apparently these boats provide more margin and a better chance at survival compared to selling more smaller boats. Lastly, I don't know that as a percentage of income that the cruiser racer of the 70's-80's posed any less financial burden that today's offerings.

Going back to your comments on rating schemes and results, you have confused me. If a new design boat completes a course of sail faster than a older boat design, but looses the "race" because of a handicap system, are you saying those are the results that matter and the old boat is the better boat?

Many people see lots of issues with the PHRF ratings, sometimes with diametrically opposed views. Many think the system is flawed if the newer boats don't dominate and others complain if older boats seem uncompetitive.

Regarding declining numbers participating in DTB, consider that it does compete with another, shorter, distance race will less daunting logistical issues.

 

[anthemj24]

The J24 is my favorite case as are first new sailboat was a Victoria 18 which was a nice boat on the shallow Great South Bay

But when we moved to Peconic Bay we kept getting beat up and seeing these strange looking boats go by and trust me the J24 was a strange looking boat in 1981

Anyway at the age of 26 or 27 I was able trade in the 18 and but a new J24 with a pretty limited income

At 57 with a far bigger income I find the thought of dropping 50,000++ dollars on a tiny boat a NO GO and cant begin to justify close to 200,000 on a new 30 foot

With the way sailboat sales are going I would think I have plenty of company

Yep. With our kids now grown and independent, we suddenly have a bit more money in our pockets. We could definitely afford upgrading to a J70 or J88, but I just can't justify it based on how we use the boat. The 24 does everything we want it to, with the added advantage of being able to buy one regatta sails for half off retail whenever we need new ones. The money that would have gone for the newest toy is instead going into retirement, so we can better enjoy the toys we already have.

 

[jephotog]

Every dog has its day. The downwind scream for the H33 was its day. My boat (crew not owner) beat the TP52, as well as the rest of the fleet, after correction both days last weekend even though we could not see the TP52 after a few hours it was so far ahead of the fleet. My boat is well sailed and can do well but we are in the top half of the fleet usually but dont win every time out. This last Saturday and Sunday was a close reach with a short spinnaker finish. A race with no downwind component was to our advantage. Excellent crew work and a lack of downwind legs put us at an advantage, compared to our competition, who turns out "set their sails and sat on the rails".

The object of the PHRF rating is to find the boat underated and sail it to its potential and hopefull win. Of course the super rich guy is going to buy the newest boat out there and outfit his crew in matching uniforms because he can and it makes him look good sitting at the helm, he deserves it because he can afford it. The smart guy buys a boat he can sail to its rating and can win probably more often. This is the reason Dennis Conner has owned nearly 100 boats over the years.

I think an older saiboat can be a good deal up front to get into racing but eventually the cost of campaigning will be the same. The cost of slip fees, new sails and feeding the crew does not change with the age of the boat.

 

[jameswilson29]

... If a new design boat completes a course of sail faster than a older boat design, but looses the "race" because of a handicap system, are you saying those are the results that matter and the old boat is the better boat?

That is not what happened with the Hobie. Most of the new design boats were beaten on elapsed time (real time) by a 30 year old boat. The Hobie 33 finished 4th overall in real time out of 31 boats, most larger, newer and much more expensive. (It corrected to 1st, just as the J/24 corrected to 2nd and still beat a lot of boats in elapsed time.)

Even if you dismiss the results as a reflection of the Hobie's strength on one point of sail, the fact is, it appears no one has built a better Hobie 33 type boat in 30 years of supposed advances in sailboat design and materials.

Many people see lots of issues with the PHRF ratings, sometimes with diametrically opposed views. Many think the system is flawed if the newer boats don't dominate and others complain if older boats seem uncompetitive.

My point was never about PHRF, although some posters misinterpreted it that way.

My essential point was the fact that an inexpensive 30 year old boat blew the doors off the fleet, despite the constant hype about all the new technological marvels appearing on the water, which have made boats much more expensive, but not correspondingly much more faster.

Perhaps, sailboats are essentially low tech vessels, and the tremendous expenditures to improve their performance with high technology is misplaced and has come at the expense of lower overall participation due to new boat prices.

 

[chucklesR]

Meanwhile I dawdled down the bay that day at 7 knots on main only. My PHRF is a seriously misguided 126 (New England area, no one is silly enough to race a Irwin 38 CC MkII on on the Chesapeake). The only plane she'll see is the one passing overhead.
I'll bet my time on anchor at Galesville was just as much fun .

I 'race' a Hunter 216, stock(ish). PHRF 192.
It's a game - we crush heavy classic plastic PHRF'ing 30 seconds below us in 10 kts or less because we are at hull speed and they are struggling for steerage.
In 20 kts, we try to finish the course and stay on the boat.
I gave up PHRF racing, too easy to trick the system. I've got trophies on my mantle for being committee boat (we score committee boat as a 3rd place, I've won silver for not raising my sails).

 

[jephotog]

Maybe the newer boat owners had way too much money and pride invested to let the boat be sailed as hard as it needed to be to win. "I don't want to break it as i can barely afford the payments as it is"

 

[PalmettoSailor]

That is not what happened with the Hobie. Most of the new design boats were beaten on elapsed time by a 30 year old boat. The Hobie 33 finished 4th out of 31 boats, most larger, newer and much more expensive. (It corrected to 1st, just as the J/24 corrected to 2nd and still beat a lot of boats in elapsed time.)

My point was never about PHRF, although some posters misinterpreted it that way.

My essential point was the fact that an inexpensive 30 year old boat blew the doors off the fleet, despite the constant hype about all the new technological marvels appearing on the water, which have made boats much more expensive, but not correspondingly much more faster.

But as others have pointed out, in one set of conditions that ideally suited that boat. In 2009 and 2010's windward races, the same boat was mid pack at best. I can't see asserting its an all round better boat. Most races involve upwind and downwind in more equal measures.

I also don't know how the owner prepares his boat, but he could be spending a huge percentage of the boats value every year for a racing bottom and the latest technology in sails and rigging, while you see very few fully race prepared modern cruising boats.

 

[PCP]

There is a reason why there are races, and actual results.
....
Results matter.

In sailing, when the wind blows 20-30 knots on the race course, the hype and the B.S. are separated from the reality. These theoretically faster boats are apparently not showing up for the races. ....

...

... Now, the bulk of boats are either expensive production condo cruisers that appeal to wives at boat shows (and rate no better than the 70s and 80s racer/cruisers of the same LOA), or expensive all-out high-tech racing boats that break fairly easily. ....

...

.....

There you go again: Today boats are not more expensive than 30 year old boats but less. What kind of price comparison is to compare a used 30 year old boat with a brand new boat?

New boats only don't show in US because US overall picture in what regards sail racing is pretty low. Nobody competing on major races with 30 year old boats in Europe and there are plenty of new boats, that normally win the races that sometimes have more than a 1000 boats racing.

Yes, race results does matter and it is because of that that on major races the ones that comes first on elapsed time in what regards cruiser-racers are recent boats...if they are racing there.

A good example of an American fast boat of that size is the J111, that would beat a Hobie 33 in any conditions, being also a very good upwind sailboat.

The fact that you have J111 racing in almost all European races and almost none racing in what you call major US races (like that one) is sad and shows the difference between sailboat racing interest (and sailing) between the two continents.

Have a look at two other modern boats that will be as faster or more downwind as a Hobie 33 and that will smoke it upwind or in any other point of sail, the Xp 33 and the J111:

None of them is a fragile boat or a carbon boat and by the way where do you got the idea that the carbon race boats are fragile boats or that break easily?

Regards

Paulo

 

[anthemj24]

Meanwhile I dawdled down the bay that day at 7 knots on main only. My PHRF is a seriously misguided 126 (New England area, no one is silly enough to race a Irwin 38 CC MkII on on the Chesapeake). The only plane she'll see is the one passing overhead.
I'll bet my time on anchor at Galesville was just as much fun .

I 'race' a Hunter 216, stock(ish). PHRF 192.
It's a game - we crush heavy classic plastic PHRF'ing 30 seconds below us in 10 kts or less because we are at hull speed and they are struggling for steerage.
In 20 kts, we try to finish the course and stay on the boat.
I gave up PHRF racing, too easy to trick the system. I've got trophies on my mantle for being committee boat (we score committee boat as a 3rd place, I've won silver for not raising my sails).

126 seems like a brutal rating for that boat. Did the owner run over the handicappers dog or something?

We race Portsmouth here. All ratings systems suck, you can't take it too seriously. It gives you a chance to have fun sailing against non-identical boats. Without it, all I could do is match race the same guy all year long, and that would get boring pretty quick.

 

[anthemj24]

There you go again: Today boats are not more expensive than 30 year old boats but less. What kind of price comparison is to compare a used 30 year old boat with a brand new boat?

New boats only don't show in US because US overall picture in what regards sail racing is pretty low. Nobody competing on major races with 30 year old boats in Europe and there are plenty of new boats, that normally win the races that sometimes have more than a 1000 boats racing.

Yes, race results does matter and it is because of that that on major races the ones that comes first on elapsed time in what regards cruiser-racers are recent boats...if they are racing there.

A good example of an American fast boat of that size is the J111, that would beat a Hobie 33 in any conditions, being also a very good upwind sailboat.

The fact that you have J111 racing in almost all European races and almost none racing in what you call major US races (like that one) is sad and shows the difference between sailboat racing interest (and sailing) between the two continents.

Have a look at two other modern boats that will be as faster or more downwind as a Hobie 33 and that will smoke it upwind or in any other point of sail, the Xp 33 and the J111:

None of them is a fragile boat or a carbon boat and by the way where do you got the idea that the carbon race boats are fragile boats or that break easily?

Regards

Paulo

Don't take the entries in one race and try to extrapolate that to all racing in the Chessy or US. There are a couple of J111s down there on the bay, and there was even a TP52 in this race. DTB is a long race that usually turns into a drift fest by morning, so a lot of boats don't do it. I am not even a Chessy racer and I know that.

 

[chucklesR]

126 seems like a brutal rating for that boat. Did the owner run over the handicappers dog or something?

We race Portsmouth here. All ratings systems suck, you can't take it too seriously. It gives you a chance to have fun sailing against non-identical boats. Without it, all I could do is match race the same guy all year long, and that would get boring pretty quick.

Not a problem, racing a 20k pound center cockpit around a couple buoys on a river is just not my style. I'd rather go out and watch the other folks collide and fight for a 9 dollar trophy.

 

[PCP]

Don't take the entries in one race and try to extrapolate that to all racing in the Chessy or US. There are a couple of J111s down there on the bay, and there was even a TP52 in this race. DTB is a long race that usually turns into a drift fest by morning, so a lot of boats don't do it. I am not even a Chessy racer and I know that.

Not me, It was James that said that was a major race. Fact is that besides the Farr 400 and the Tp52 there was not any modern racers on that race and not a single modern cruiser-racer. We cannot compare the performance of a 30 year old cruiser racer with the ones of modern ones if they are not racing there.

Besides, giving the absence of a decent fleet the chances that you would find a boat much better sailed than any other ( the Hobie 33 in this case) are big and that makes any boat comparison in what regards performance irrelevant.

If you have a major race with lots of top racers and lots of top boats the chances are that there will be several boats very well sailed and not only one and that makes much more relevant boat comparisons because we know that the boats were sailed by similarly skilled crews.

Regards

Paulo

 

[jameswilson29]

There you go again: Today boats are not more expensive than 30 year old boats but less. What kind of price comparison is to compare a used 30 year old boat with a brand new boat?

O.K., how about this one: Apparently, you could still buy a Hobie 33 in 2003 for $55,000 : Torresen Sailing and Boating News » Blog Archive » One Design Comeback Hobie 33

At about the same time, I believe the J/105 (one of the least expensive of the newer Asym sportboats) was in the $150-200,000 range.

That is exactly my point.

Where are the new, production raceboats like the old Santa Cruz 27, J/27, Olson 30, and Hobie 33?

These were superfast for their day, relatively spartan, low tech boats for the average (did-well-financially) Joe to race: regular hand-laid fiberglass hull, regular aluminum single spreader rig, simple layout, simple gear, and regular lead keel.

Now you have to buy a scrimp, vacumn-bagged epoxy hull with a carbon fiber mast, a carbon fiber foil, and a more complicated, expensive rig and gear, not to mention electronics. The entry costs are much greater now. And for what? An incremental speed gain in light air?

The relatively, inexpensive new speedsters don't exist anymore. That fact that those boats are still competitive says something about where modern race design has gone.

 

[anthemj24]

Not a problem, racing a 20k pound center cockpit around a couple buoys on a river is just not my style. I'd rather go out and watch the other folks collide and fight for a 9 dollar trophy.

They spend that much on the trophies down there huh? If I were dictator for a day, the trophy would be a bottle of wine and the rules of the club would dictate that it must be immediately shared with the fleet upon being awarded. All protests would be held during said sharing of the wine.

 

[anthemj24]

O.K., how about this one: Apparently, you could still buy a Hobie 33 in 2003 for $55,000 : Torresen Sailing and Boating News » Blog Archive » One Design Comeback Hobie 33

At about the same time, I believe the J/105 (one of the least expensive of the newer Asym sportboats) was in the $150-200,000 range.

That is exactly my point.

Where are the new, production raceboats like the old Santa Cruz 27, J/27, Olson 30, and Hobie 33?

These were superfast for their day, relatively spartan, low tech boats for the average (did-well-financially) Joe to race: regular hand-laid fiberglass hull, regular aluminum single spreader rig, simple layout, simple gear, and regular lead keel.

Now you have to buy a scrimp, vacumn-bagged epoxy hull with a carbon fiber mast, a carbon fiber foil, and a more complicated, expensive rig and gear, not to mention electronics. The entry costs are much greater now. And for what? An incremental speed gain in light air?

The relatively, inexpensive new speedsters don't exist anymore. That fact that those boats are still competitive says something about where modern race design has gone.

The Flying Tiger 10 is pretty much now what the Hobie 33 was then. It is very fast and very affordable, and they just don't sell a ton of them. The cost of campaigning a boat in the 35ft range is very high regardless of the initial price. Plus the logistics are crazy. I had a half baked idea to do more racing and get a sport boat I could trailer around, once I started adding up the costs in time, money, and grey hair, I bagged the whole idea. The price of the boat was the last thing on my mind, instead it was the hotels, gas for the tow vehicle, new sails each year, restaurant bills, and trying to get 5 people to commit to a full schedule given the realities of today's work schedules. The guys who can take that time off, or pay people to put a campaign together for them, pay for all the maintenance, crew, and other expenses, are not going to skimp on the initial price.

 

[zz4gta]

James, you're missing the point. The ONLY reason the older boats are competitive is because of their handicap rating. That's it. Take away the rating, and they are obsolete. Still a fun boat to sail, but boats that are 20-30 years old will not hang with a new race boat. Period.

 

[CBinRI]

James, you're missing the point. The ONLY reason the older boats are competitive is because of their handicap rating. That's it. Take away the rating, and they are obsolete. Still a fun boat to sail, but boats that are 20-30 years old will not hang with a new race boat. Period.

Of course, and I don't believe he is missing the point. His point is not that the older boats can beat the high tech new boats head to head. He is simpy saying that they can be very competitive in handicap racing and can give a high bang for your buck fun ratio, which is really the point of handicap racing.

 

[SchockT]

Races like that one do not represent the pinnacle of racing in North America, rather it represents a typical "run what you brung" phrf club race. The beauty of races like that is that anyone CAN win, even the oldies. Any given boat can benefit from being on the right side of a big shift, fleet compression on a dying breeze, or other teams mistakes. It is not an indication of one boat's overall superiority, nor is it an indictment of modern technology. (Don't forget, even the old boats benefit from technological advancements in sail, rope, and hardware technologies.) I have been in races like that one where even a lowly San Juan 24 has won overall. I am sure that San Juan owner was happy to get the pickle dish, and his moment of fame, but was under no illusion that his boat was superior to the rest of the boats in the fleet.

The Hobie 33, like the Olson 30 I race on, is capable of getting onto a sustained plane in the right conditions, and when that happens, all bets are off, because any displacement boats, no matter how new and expensive are not going to win a drag race. In a well set up buoy race that advantage may be partially offset by.the upwind legs where the bigger faster rated boats may be able to stretch out enough to hold their lead off the wind.

The J24 owes it's success to good marketing and strong one design fleets. One design crews tend to be more polished and know how to get the most out of their boats. At the same time they have tended to have pretty soft ratings under phrF, since the vast majority race one design so their rating has not evolved as other boats have. They are NOT particularly good boats overall, they are good one design boats. If you compare them to their more modern replacements like the Melges 24 they are complete dogs!

 

[anthemj24]

Races like that one do not represent the pinnacle of racing in North America, rather it represents a typical "run what you brung" phrf club race. The beauty of races like that is that anyone CAN win, even the oldies. Any given boat can benefit from being on the right side of a big shift, fleet compression on a dying breeze, or other teams mistakes. It is not an indication of one boat's overall superiority, nor is it an indictment of modern technology. (Don't forget, even the old boats benefit from technological advancements in sail, rope, and hardware technologies.) I have been in races like that one where even a lowly San Juan 24 has won overall. I am sure that San Juan owner was happy to get the pickle dish, and his moment of fame, but was under no illusion that his boat was superior to the rest of the boats in the fleet.

The Hobie 33, like the Olson 30 I race on, is capable of getting onto a sustained plane in the right conditions, and when that happens, all bets are off, because any displacement boats, no matter how new and expensive are not going to win a drag race. In a well set up buoy race that advantage may be partially offset by.the upwind legs where the bigger faster rated boats may be able to stretch out enough to hold their lead off the wind.

The J24 owes it's success to good marketing and strong one design fleets. One design crews tend to be more polished and know how to get the most out of their boats. At the same time they have tended to have pretty soft ratings under phrF, since the vast majority race one design so their rating has not evolved as other boats have. They are NOT particularly good boats overall, they are good one design boats. If you compare them to their more modern replacements like the Melges 24 they are complete dogs!

I agree with some of what you say here, but the idea that the J24 has a soft PHRF rating is just not true. The same guys racing their a**es off in regional one design events are also sailing weds nights and other local PHRF events. J24s that do consistently well in PHRF are being sailed hard and sailed well. A rating of 168 is no gift, and with >5000 hulls sailing for over 30 years, it is one of the most well established ratings you could find.

I also think it is a mistake to compare the Melges 24 to the J24, they are completely different boats. If I traded the J for a Melges, my wife would never get on the boat again. You could not pay me to sit on the rail of a Melges 24, hanging over the lifelines by my midsection. They are fast and cool boats, but a completely different design criteria and set of requirements. I can not imagine anyone attempting to do the DTB race in a Melges 24, you might as well be doing it in a Hobie or Thistle. Aside from being boats that are popular to race and the same length, there is very little in common between them.

I don't know that there exists a boat which is "good overall", just ones that meet a set of design criteria and ones that fail to meet a set of design criteria.

 

[PCP]

..

Where are the new, production raceboats like the old Santa Cruz 27, J/27, Olson 30, and Hobie 33?

These were superfast for their day, relatively spartan, low tech boats for the average (did-well-financially) Joe to race: regular hand-laid fiberglass hull, regular aluminum single spreader rig, simple layout, simple gear, and regular lead keel.

Now you have to buy a scrimp, vacumn-bagged epoxy hull with a carbon fiber mast, a carbon fiber foil, and a more complicated, expensive rig and gear, not to mention electronics. The entry costs are much greater now. And for what? An incremental speed gain in light air?

The relatively, inexpensive new speedsters don't exist anymore. That fact that those boats are still competitive says something about where modern race design has gone.

I continue without understanding. An Olson, a Santa Cruz or a Hobbie were not in their time more expensive than a Jboat and a Jboat is not comparatively more expensive now than what it was 30 years ago.

There are plenty of new boat like that in Europe, they are not exported to the US because the market for that kind of boats in the US is very small.

Just some boats that go on that category: Surprise, A31, Salona 33, Elan 310, A27, seascape 27, Pogo 30, First 35, Malango 888, Django 7.6, Sunfast 32, JPK 998, Dehler 29....well I could continue to post boats... I find the situation amusing : Americans don't want or buy that kind of boats and then you complain that they don't exist on the market. For having a market it is necessary to have enough sailors wanting a given type of boat and does not count the ones that only buy used old boats.

Well James, that is mot happening on the US. The ones that want new boats want Hunters, Jeanneaus and Benetaus or Bavarias, even in what regards 30/33ft boats. They don't want fast boats with a less big or good interior and James, size for size, quality for quality fast boats were always more expensive than slower boats: You can see that comparing the Benetau with the First or the Cruising line of Elan with the performance line. The reasons are obvious.

Regards

Paulo