[C320-list] fin vs. wing keel

[Flyingmonkey]

I concur with Allan. If you have not run aground then you need to sail more and explore new areas.  I have not yet sailed my 320 enough, but this my first season with her. ;-)

Lou Hodac
S/V Blue Moon
Hull #702 

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 29, 2011, at 2:13 PM, "Allan S. Field" <allan.field at verizon.net> wrote:

> It really depends what the bottom is and how hard you go in.  With 20 knots
> of wind on the stern and motoring at 6 knots, we went into mud.  The wing in
> this case acts like a sucking anchor; the boat was stuck until we got a tow.
> Even tried kedging with an anchor and the boat never budged.  And you really
> need to be careful trying to power off as all the muck the prop stirs up
> comes up through the engine seawater intake and can foul things from there.
> We have gone aground several other times but in soft stuff at lower speeds
> and were able to get off, once with putting 6 of us leaning as far out as we
> could to port to pop one side of the wing out of the mud.  For the
> Chesapeake Bay, I think that a wing is the way to go, try to be careful, and
> know you may need help if you do go in.  A fin on the Bay, at a 6-foot
> draft, would further limit where we could get into.  On my previous boat, I
> had a 4-foot draft with a fin and was able to use a spinnaker pole to push
> off; there is no way I could do that with this heavier boat with a wing
> keel.
> 
> And now the fun starts - why does Allan go aground so much?  Because he
> sails a lot?!
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Allan S. Field
> Sea Shadow - #808
> Columbia, MD
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com
> [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf Of Flyingmonkey
> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 11:15 AM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] fin vs. wing keel
> 
> I'd like to hear from those who have actually experienced a grounding with
> the wing keel. This is my first wing keel vessel and I'd like to know what
> to expect when it happens. I'm a realist when it comes to these things.
> There are those who have run aground and those who have not "yet" run
> aground. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Lou Hodac
> S/V Blue Moon
> Hull#702
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Oct 29, 2011, at 11:00 AM, Andrew Santangelo <andrew_santangelo at mac.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello All,  
>> 
>> I would also add the fin keel works for most of the great lakes.  We had
> some close calls in the Kalamazoo River in Saugatuck off Lake Michigan,
> otherwise the fin keel also works great in this region.  
>> 
>> The big issue is if you plan to race your vessel at all and want a chance
> to place you really need to go to the fin keel - the pointing ability and
> carrying less mass is a huge difference.  Now I cruised extensively all over
> the great lakes before racing and I still cruise quite a bit and I have to
> say pointing better towards my destination and going a tad faster to beat
> some coming weather is an added boost I love. I have also see a few wing
> keels run aground.  It is not pretty getting off vs. a fin keel.    When
> sailing in shallow water, I really try to avoid cutting it close regardless
> of fin or wing keel.  Of course that is what GPS, chart plotters and tide
> charts are for.
>> 
>> Regarding west coast sailing since I did the massive move/shipping of Dawn
> Treader to SFO - lots of wind, you fly with the tides (weather you want to
> or not), and a fin keel is totally fine.
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> Andrew 
>> 
>> C320
>> "Dawn Treader"
>> #333
>> San Francisco
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 29, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Brad Kuether wrote:
>> 
>>> If you can sail comfortably in your waters without worrying about going
> aground get the fin.  The performace difference is remarkable.   But if you
> have any doubt on depth, you open up a LOT of options with the wing.  And to
> be honest, I move along OK.  (folding prop really helps here...) Pointing is
> a different matter.  I find with the 150 up front and sheeted in tight, I do
> better, but nothing great.
>>> 
>>> My prior C&C had a 5'4" fin, and that was boarderline.  I did OK in the
> upper Chesapeake.  Some anchorages were out of scope.
>>> 
>>> 6 feet plus under a Catalina 320?  No way.  Not here.
>>> 
>>> -Brad, Mary, Monica, and Jarod
>>> "Independence"
>>> 2004 Catalina 320 Hull 1006
>>> Middle River, MD
>>> 
>>> PS - First snowfall of the season has begun in earnest.  Its supposed to
> be bright and sunny with highs still in the low 60s!!!!!!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Burti" <clburti at gmail.com>
>>> To: <C320-List at catalina320.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 1:15 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] fin vs. wing keel
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The simplest rule of thumb is for East Coast cruising...get a wing
>>> keel...West Coast, a fin is fine.
>>> 
>>> There is simply too much thin water South of Norfolk not to take
>>> advantage of the extra foot of clearance..
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Gene Helfman <genehelfman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>> Dear all: In our ongoing search for a 320 (ca. 2000 +/-), we've run into
> a
>>>> mixture of opinions on the qualities of the shallow vs. deep draft
> boats.
>>>> We have a harbor and hoist situation in our home port that makes 6 ft
> draft
>>>> problematic but not impossible. Would anyone like to chime in on the
> costs
>>>> and benefits of the wing keel boats (of which fewer were produced and
> are
>>>> harder to find) vs. the deeper-draft fin keel boats? We intend to cruise
>>>> not race so faster turning isn't much of an issue.
>>>> 
>>>> thanks,
>>>> gene
>>>> --
>>>> Gene Helfman, Professor Emeritus
>>>> Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia
>>>> PERMANENT address:
>>>> 498 Shoreland Dr., Lopez Is., WA 98261
>>>> (360) 468-2136
>>>> genehelfman at gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>> "Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day,
>>>> Teach a man to fish and he'll deplete the
>>>> oceans."
>>>> 
> 
>