[C320-list] compass

[Elizabeth Schwartz]

Ahoy all....does anyone know the model # of the binnacle mounted 
compass......it a Ritchie Powerdamp.......is it 4 1/2 diameter mount? 
Mine is badly scatched and am looking to replace......Joe....#245


On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 06:01 PM, Amirault Family wrote:

> Ted:
>
>
> Only my .02$, and for our American readers worth less (worthless?) as 
> it is
> in Canadian funds. I faced this issue on my '01 in '14 and discussed 
> my
> needs with my local sail maker representative - the only one here is 
> Doyle,
> but any would do as well. Generally we are all interested in 
> performance,
> longevity, and price; and not necessarily in that order. I race 
> (poorly)
> Thursday night JAM on the local river in Ottawa. Here's how it 
> unfolded for
> me.
>
>
> There are choices in type of materials, and sub-choices in quality 
> within a
> category. The best bang for my buck (NOT the best sail) was high 
> modulus and
> more expensive Dacron with a radial cut. Dacron lasts longer and is 
> cheaper;
> an important consideration when presenting the proposal to the local 
> Board
> of Economy. Additionally, its performance deteriorates slowly over 
> time
> without actually failing. This is why you can see boats propelled by 
> their
> original 30 year old Dacron sails while never seeing boats propelled 
> by
> their original 30 year old Mylar sails. Opting for radial rather than 
> slab
> cut makes a significant increase in price, but the extra labour yields 
> a
> sail of better shape which retains that shape for longer as the Dacron
> begins to relax with the years. As mentioned by others, a foam luff 
> will
> greatly support general sail shape when furling.
>
>
> Shape of the sail. I race with a full and robust crew, but also
> casual/cruise sail with only my low-upper-body-strength spouse for 
> crew. The
> then current headsail was the original 150. Because I river sail, and 
> as the
> prevailing wind is downriver, on most weekends you're in crowded water 
> and
> everyone is doing frequent tacks as you quickly run out of river on
> approaching the shore. To that end, vision forward with only 
> spouse-as-crew
> was VERY important to me as you really need to see. I asked Doyle for 
> a full
> Yankee cut which would yield a very high foot at a sharp angle. Doyle
> wouldn't do it claiming the customer is NOT always right and I would 
> regret
> it, so we settled for a modified Yankee with a more shallow rise but 
> not
> parallel to the deck. This compromise proved correct as ther eis more 
> sail
> area than with the "full Yankee" but I still get good vision while 
> sitting
> to the side of the wheel.
>
>
> Size of the sail was influenced by climate and my cruising crew 
> situation.
> On race nights here, because land is so close on both sides of the 
> water,
> the wind is frequently gusting double digits at race start and reduces 
> to
> light by the time the sun begins to set and so we often begin a race 
> with at
> least one reef which we let out as the wind conditions allow. So we 
> find
> that the best balance rather than using the 150 is to start with a 
> reef and
> either some furl or the full 135. For cruising my spouse will not take 
> the
> helm in less than dire circumstance and so when tacking and furling 
> I'm
> handling the wheel and she the sheets. She has problems handling the 
> 150 in
> any wind, so I needed less sail to ease her workload, and settled on 
> the
> 135. This size has proved optimal for cruising with the spouse as it 
> is a
> good balance between ease of handling that you get and performance 
> that you
> give up when moving to a smaller sail. In moderate wind while racing, 
> the
> radial cut smaller jib actually gives me better speed and pointing 
> than the
> original larger slab cut sail. HOWEVER.if you are racing, I would not
> recommend the 135 for a C320, and would not elect this size again, as 
> there
> are some things that you just can't know until you actually fly your 
> new
> sail. In good wind, and as cut, the 135 cannot be sheeted in as far as 
> I
> would like for optimal performance because by coincidence the spreader 
> rests
> just inside the sail area and there is insufficient billow to the sail 
> to
> fully sheet the sail in while keeping the material off the spreader; 
> so
> we're forced to adjust it just a little out of trim to keep the fabric 
> free
> of contact.
>
> So there you have it. Your local wind may be lighter. You may not pine 
> for
> race performance. Your budget may be more or less constrained. You and 
> all
> those around you may be able to hold a tack much longer. There are 
> plenty of
> permutations which would suggest a solution other than mine. The above 
> works
> for me.
>
>
> Regards;
>
>
> Brian Amirault
> 797 Waltzing Bear, too
>
>