[C320-list] Rope vs Foam Luff
Jon Vez
jonvez at comcast.net
Thu Mar 6 09:49:12 PST 2008
Orlando,
I went through the same thing when buying my replacement sails. One
advantage of the rope luff from North is that it is removable. It is fairly
easy to remove/add back, so this does give you the benefit over foam (not to
mention the fact that sail makers are moving away from foam due to
mold/mildew issues...
BTW--all these sails go on sale starting in August--you can get substantial
discounts if you order around this time..
Regards,
Jon Vez
Solstice #582
-----Original Message-----
From: c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com
[mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf Of
Orlando.Duran at AveryDennison.com
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:50 AM
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Rope vs Foam Luff
The weight isn't the negative but the size of the rope luff relative to
the foam...you have much more disturbance with the rope vs the foam...I am
in the market for a new headsail myself because I just absolutely hate the
stock Catalina headsails, so I have spoken at length on the different
types of sails and have received quotes from North (3DL Marathon), UK
(Tape Drive), Quantum (Fusion M), even the North guy recommended (on a
performance basis only) the foam vs the rope.
When I speak of performance (mine not withstanding), I am talking about a
fully unfurled Genoa and not a furled one...as you furl, anything on that
luff will keep a much better shape and therefore the performance
degradation is not that important (or noticeable) as the wind increases
and you need to reduce sail...
cuba libre 3
Karl Krueger
<smoothsail282 at s
bcglobal.net> To
Sent by: C320-List at Catalina320.com
c320-list-bounce cc
s at lists.catalina
320.com Subject
Re: [C320-list] Rope vs Foam Luff
03/06/2008 08:30
AM
Please respond
to
C320-List at Catali
na320.com
Orlando:
Are you implying that the rope luff has a negative affect on performance
when comparaed to a foam luff? I'm curious as to your thoughts. I would
think the plus side to the rope is that it holds it's shape longer. It
also drys faster when wet. Is the weight that much different?
What do other 320 owners think?
I have rope luff in my North, Marathon Sails, (3DL, cursing sails). It
seem to keep better shape of the luff than my original head sail w/foam
luff. From what the sail maker told me the rope luff was also lighter
weight.
Karl Krueger (Milwaukee, "Kindred Spirit", #282)
Chef Adam Wiener <esquire catering at rcn.com> wrote:
I didn't know you had performance concerns.
Adam
-----Original Message-----
From: c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com
[mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf Of
Orlando.Duran at AveryDennison.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:28 PM
To: C320-List
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 155 vs. 135
Be careful with that rope luff, it really affects performance a whole
lot...
----------------------------------
Regards,
OD
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Church" [jjemail at comcast.net]
Sent: 03/05/2008 06:53 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 155 vs. 135
Kirk,
I just ordered sails from Doyle and asked for a foam luff. They told me
that
they switched from foam to rope several years ago.
JeffC
----- Original Message -----
From: Kirk McCullough
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 155 vs. 135
Does Doyle use a foam luff? I bought a new higher cut 135 from a local
sailmaker, which has the foam luff. It furls so nicely with foam, keeps
great sail shape down to about 80% or even less.
Kirk
#124
----- Original Message -----
From: "Amirault Family - S&B"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 3:49 PM
Subject: [C320-list] 155 vs. 135
> Sam:
>
>
>
> My non-race crew is 5 feet tall and lacks upper body strength. She has
> found
> the 155% to be a handful. We have ordered a higher cut 135% from Doyle
for
> spring delivery. This size was selected after talking to the local sail
> makers reps. It is claimed by size to be a much more easily handled
sail,
> which can take considerable furling before losing meaningful shape. It
is
> thus hoped that when the wind is across the river she can take advantage
> of
> the full sail size, and when the wind is down river that we can still
make
> useful progress with it furled in to a point where she can handle it
> readily.
>
>
>
> Doyle got the nod solely due to its apparent better value for the price
> being asked.
>
>
>
> Of course having the crew take the wheel would be a solution if she were
> willing. It also will not hurt JAM race participation that we have a
> smaller
> alternate headsail to fly on more blustery race nights.
>
>
>
> Brian Amirault
>
> 797 Waltzing Bear, too
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.4/1313 - Release Date:
3/5/2008
> 9:50 AM
>
>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.
More information about the C320-list
mailing list