[C320-list] Boom Vang Hydraulic Spring

Fri May 30 09:44:06 PDT 2014

Thank you all for the excellent support.  I will be investigating the vang
spring more closely this weekend when I visit Saline.  As to proper topping
lift adjustment.  I used to diligently adjust  the topping lift just to the
point it almost starts to cause the leech to soften.  Lifting the boom any
higher would definitely affect the main sail set.  Despite this twice I had
wraps that caused damage. Must remember that San Francisco Bay especially in
the central bay area often has several foot swells, whitecaps, 15 -20+ knot
winds and chop.  There are no gentle tacks.  

But it does appear that the yard that commissioned Saline never adjusted the
vang spring properly or the unit was defective.  I should have investigated
more closely after the first episode.  What brought my attention to this
recently is I saw an advertisement for Boomkicker (www.boomkicker.com) which
is a cleaver fiberglass spring that is offered to keep booms lifted.  In
speaking with their tech guru, Ted, and sharing a photo of Saline he
expressed surprise that my vang strut didn't provide the same benefit.  This
has probably caused him a sale, but my appreciation of his honesty.  If you
don't have a vang strut you should check out Boomkicker.  

Again thanks for the help.
Steve
Saline Hull 980
San Francisco

-----Original Message-----
From: C320-list [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf
Of tharrison at innovations-plus.com
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 7:23 AM
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Boom Vang Hydraulic Spring

I am in agreement with Warren. I have hull 424 with the same issue. 

The boom vang does not support the boom. 

I think it should. The boat is new to me at thought it was my lack of
understanding! 

Ted 

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 30, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Warren Updike <wupdike at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> So far, all of the Boom Vang related posts are from hulls 600 and 
> later. I suspect these hulls all have the Selden mast/boom. We have 62 
> with the older
> (non-Selden) mast/boom and our vang has never supported the boom. I'm 
> wondering if it ever did. Can anyone with the original mast/boom tell 
> me if I should expect the vang to support the boom? If so, has anyone 
> had to replace the internal spring mechanism?
> Thanks,
> 
> Warren and Pattie Updike
> 1994 C320 "Warr de Mar" #62
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Kaplan [mailto:stepkap at pacbell.net]
> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 12:14 AM
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Boom Vang Hydraulic Spring
> 
> Definitely getting the believe that my vang has never worked properly.
> Appreciate the input. 
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sloat <resloat at comcast.net>
> Sender: "C320-list" <c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com>
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 21:17:14
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com<C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Reply-To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Boom Vang Hydraulic Spring
> 
> Steve-The boom vang is spring loaded on my hull 894 and yours is 
> probably the same.  I use the topping lift for the Dutchman flaking 
> system.  The vang easily holds up the main without the need for a 
> topping lift so your vang must be broken or maybe there is some 
> adjustment for loading the vang spring.  I think it is Gaurhauer and 
> they may have some input on adjustment or repair.  When the solid vang is
working.
> 
>> On May 29, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Stephen Kaplan <stepkap at pacbell.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Fellow sailors,
>> After twice having the topping lift wrap around and hang-up on the 
>> back
> stay
>> "V" causing damage to the boom vang saddle fasteners on the mast I 
>> have taken to sailing w/o the topping lift.  Removes the worry of the 
>> wrap occurring on the rather vigorous tacks common on San Francisco Bay.
>> However the Boom Vang hydraulic spring does not hold or lift up the 
>> boom when furling or unfurling the main. Thus requires a crew to hold 
>> the boom
> to
>> keep it from smashing into the helm pedestal/instrument cluster.  Is 
>> this the normal situation or has the hydraulic cylinder lost its oomph?
>> 
>> Steve Kaplan
>> Saline
>> Hull 980
>> San Francisco
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C320-list [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On 
>> Behalf Of Dick Walker
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 5:30 PM
>> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
>> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Best place to attach cockpit radio extension 
>> mic
>> 
>> On pod since 2000 and just fine
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Dick Walker
>> 740 Olive Ave.
>> Coronado ,CA 92118
>> 619.435.8986
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 28, 2014, at 17:22, Mark Gillingham <markgill at uwalumni.com>
wrote:
>>> 
>>> I attached an extension mic in the cockpit on port just between the 
>>> lids for the propane well and the settee. That's not too bad for the 
>>> the helmsman, but is in the way of crew working or sitting nearby.
>>> Before the end of the first season a crewman kicked the connector 
>>> and rendered it useless.
>>> 
>>> I've considered moving it to the instrument pod, but it is very 
>>> difficult to get around the wheel to get to the mic. I think my best 
>>> move is to leave it where it is and reinforce or add a shield do the
>> connector.
>>> 
>>> What have others done?
>>> 
>>> Speakeasy #612
>>> 
>>> Mark Gillingham | gplus.to/MarkGillingham | Support a struggling 
>>> student<http://101010scholarship.info>
>>> | Harbor-To-Harbor Blog <http://www.loftnet.com> | Speakeasy
>>> Photos<http://picasaweb.google.com/mark.gillingham>
> 
> Bob Sloat
> Savannah 894 (2002)
> Waukegan Harbor, IL
> 
> 