开云体育

Good morning all. It's been over a year since I sold my T 27, Skywalker. Still miss her. My C&C 34 is still a work in progress. Glad to see the group is active. When I sold the boat, I kept the two

ok a thought on the jib/genoa these big 130--150 genoa's are was over rated just ask my crew when they have to sheet in...im going with a hank on 90-100 jib......the heck with the big over sized

I am so sorry Armando, she looks so spiffy. Good job! I'm running the jib sheets inside only temporary when I know that I will be pointing all day long or at least for three hours or so. But to be

Well.... nobody has commented on Hull 555 pictures, so I join in on the chainplate discussion. * No question regarding the improved stability/strenght of moving the chainplates out to the hull. I vote

Besides over.. .and I anyway. keep the scrap time

I would like to state that I am not changing my position as stated below. I have had the opportunity to see on other boats that are somewhat newer in design and designed by naval engineers like those

I think the myth of keeping your boat 110% stock is hogwash. Besides which, choices have been made for me that I have no control over.. .and others I don't give a damn about. Example: Air

Christian, There is no doubt about the competence of S&S designs. There is also no doubt about that the original T27 chainplates are well designed. But for me they are still only a compromise. For

Amen! --- CHRISTIAN BECKER <uni@...> wrote:

I have a long history with S & S boats. As a result, I would like to say that there are few on the this world that can suggest making a change to a S&S boat, unless they are a fully trained yacht

In 1978 my dad bought Hull #2. We sold it in 1991 to a guy named David R. from Milford, CT. I would be curious where it has ended up now. The sail number was 838, but only the spinnaker had a number.

Dear ksmith432 et al, Sorry I wasn't clearer: I meant to say that I disagree with anyone assuming that keeping the deck seal healthy means the chainplates will be reliable for decades more. Curious to

I see the point of staying with the original chainplate setup if you are racing or just want to keep your boat like it came from the factory. From the riggers point of view the outside chainplates are

Guys, I've been through the same process that Marty mentions on chainplates very recently and agree with everything he says except, beg borrow or steal a Fein Multitool to cut out the old chainplates.

I think the original Chainplate design is good for pointing. However, I'm not a performance sailor and I'd rather have 3 inches of deck that never leaks, doesn't bite my feet, and is easy and safe to

Actually, I disagree. Our 1968 chainplates looked fine from the outside, but when I opened up the encased knee the bolts were half gone...rusted away. There is no way to know if water has ever

Sidney since you liked my photo here are some more. I took them today, first time out this year. I am on Deep Creek near the mouth of the Magothy River, Nortm of Annapolis , MD. hull 555 Ambler am

the would wind, hull due flexes them suggestion

Two things you mentioned give me pause...... Of course you are the captain of your boat.... So maybe three things. 1) Towing Insurance is really an inexpensive investment. While we never want to be

I've been waiting for my rigger to go give me his opinion and thoughts on moving my shrouds to the sides of the hull. The biggest reason to move them inboard is to aid in pointing. It lets you sheet