I have been seriously considering buying a Tiger but have decided to wait a little while. But until I do.... I was looking for an alternative and I noticed that class minimum for the f-18s is just under 400 pounds. Class minimum for the 18 is 400 pounds... although not many are that close to it. I have kept up to a tiger in light upwind on my pretty heavy 18. I am not sure about moderate to heavy though. But I think the 18 would be fairly competitive. And it would allow 18 sailors that have spinnakers a chance to use them a little more often... which I know I would love to do.
<br>Any thoughts?
<br>Thanks,
<br>Todd Riccardi
<br><br><br>

Hi Todd, I just sold my Hobie 18 this spring after owning on since 1980. I have had a roller furling headsail on it and it was much faster than a spinnaker rigged H-18 sailed by Rick White and Mary Wells at the time. There are quite a few boats that were close to minimum weight - mine was a 1985 model that weighed 407# at the last Continentals we attended last year and several were lighter. I also had used a larger, mylar mainsail on the 18 for open racing which was a cut down Mystere 6.0 main. It was a giant killer that beat twenty footers boat for boat in light to medium wind. It was nick- named the Mystobie.
<br>
<br>And this is why I can not get personally enthused about the formula classes being discussed so much lately. To me it seems more like a sure fire way to halt the prgress of speed development in beach cat offerings because of the high minimum weights in the formulas. The main improvement I would desire in a bigger boat (18 or 20 footer) is significantly reduced weight. That cannot happen with the formula rule. I'll keep sailing the little boat for now. If I'm going to spend the big bucks on a new boat, I'm going to want something that is much lighter and faster than my old boats. The 16 formula rule looks much better because of the much lower min. weight. Go for that or look for a bigger mylar mainsail to give your old H-18 a real turbo boost! You could probably find a deal on a good second-hand twenty footer mainsail and have a sailmaker cut the top triangle off for a big, squarehead, mylar H-18 main that will be really fast for a small investment. And the only gear you might want is a higher purchase downhaul. It is much cheaper than a new boat that, as you have noted, is not much different from what you already have.
<br>
<br>Mike Fahle<br><br>Mystere 6.0. , Mystere 4.3 , 2 Hobie Waves

Hello Todd -
<br>
<br>-The H-18 is a great seaworthy cat ,-they have been sailed across the atlantic ,-and through the Northwest passage ,among other great cat sailing feats.
<br>
<br>-Bret and Rod -{Aussies} raced a H-18 with a chute very successfully in past Worrell 1000 race .-If your not ready for the Tiger ,-pick up a used chute pole and hareware package readily available and get some valuable practise and have fun.
<br>
<br>-Currently purchased a Supercat 15 for my kids to sail on our small inland lake ,-plan to fit a spin on it over the winter ,-have a spare chute and pole ,-there are existing large jib blocks already on it for the roller furling jib which we will change to a self tacking type ,---letting the chute provide the downwind speed ,--
<br>-The best aspect is I purchased the cat for 100 -bought a used main and jib from the very fine folks at Supercat for 200 ,-put on a new tramp ,-have a chute pole harware etc -so the entire cat with chute will be approx 600 dollars .
<br>
<br>-Believe these types of values are out there for any wanting to get into a starter or beginners cat with chute ,-A cat chute is just in effect a big jib ,very easy to learn once you have basic cat sailing skills.-Again these types of values are out there in any size or formula catagory for a very minimum investment per example .
<br> Will these older cats always be compeditive ,-no -but it is a great way to race equally with similar cats in large diverse fleets and a great way for younger and newer sailors to get started. -You generally do not win regattas until you develope racing skills over a number of years ,--then is the time to move up to a newer cat.
<br> The sport has been declining rapidly ,-We have to allow new ideas and concepts to evolve and be willing to change adopt and grow.If we don,t we will simply continue to decline.
<br>
<br>-Also started sailing H-18s in 78-79 when they first came out and raced them for a decade or so ,-it will always be my favorite cat ,--then H-21S in the Prosail and Ultimate Yacht Race events in 88 - with big full chutes .Since then have been hooked on spin rigged cats .
<br>-Now just enjoy doing distance races mainly and the occational bouys race on I-20s.-Chose an I-20 mainly to be able to race in the Worrell 1000 .It is an excellent boat ,but like many ,understand that there will certainly be lighter higher performance 20 s out in the near future ,-We have already seen a glimps into it with the CFR 20 and Marstrom 20 among other high quality lightweight cat designs -
<br>
<br>-The F-18 Class will be an excellent class and already has a number of top sailors {more than 20 }to organize start and support it ,--racing the new Nacra F-18 and know several who plan to purchase a Tiger and know numerous other excellent designs are and will continue to be readily available .This class was started in Euro in 94 and is now very popular.
<br>
<br>-The F-16 class also looks good with it,s lighter class boat weights and a rating number equall in performance to the F-18s .-It will take a few years to really get these classes going in the U S . ,-SHOULD BE GREAT FUN.
<br>
<br>-In the formation of rules for the 20s in the U S ,-just beginning discussion under the Formula 20 Forum ,-Several are for more of an open formula or equal performance class approach using ISAF and Texel rating systems as the basis and connection to international sailing,as opposed to a very specifically defined F-class.
<br>
<br>-Theoretically -A max. 20 ft rating will be established and cats will be allowed within a rules framework variables of design elements including sail area to weight , main factors in achieving speed as the other topic post mentions ,-You can either keep weight with a larger sailplan ,--keeping existing boats compeditive ,-or trade off sail area for lighter weight ,-each having a theoretical speed atvantage in a particular set of conditions along with numerous other design variables in almost infinate combination to achieve a cat platform and sailplan OF YOUR CHOOSING thats right for YOU or that you may want to built yourself or combine different existing platform ,hardware rig ,board rudder and sailplan combinations.
<br>
<br>-The Design Formula / Equal Performance approach to the 20 class will best achieve the goal of allowing existing cats new compeditive life , my guess is they will have the edge in light medium wind conditions ,- the future developement of lighter cat designs with more managable efficient sail plans ,most likely having the edge in performance in the higher wind ranges ,-
<br>
<br>-should be fun ,interesting ,and hopefully bring new life into the sport.
<br> All the best
<br> Carl<br><br>

Mike,
<br>
<br>You ar confusing Formula racing with developemental.
<br>
<br>Formula racing is an attempt to provide the benefits of one design while accomdating many different manufacturers. Enough of the parameters must be locked to provide as equal boat performance as possible.
<br>
<br>The contra to this is the developmental classes like the A class. Here there are limits to some parameters and anything goes within those. Here the emphasis is on boat design, where in formula racing the limits are in place to emphasise the sailors skills.
<br>
<br>There's a group trying to set up a F class in the US. Now is the time to get these items out for some more general discussion on what form and direction we want to head.
<br>
<br>
<br>Matt<br><br>

Hi Matt, I disagree. There is lots of discussion over what can be modified on older designs to be considered legal in Formula racing, especially by adding sail area to heavier, older designs. There is a considerably lower weight level in the Formula 16 rule. There are many new designs in the Formua 18 class with lots of "buzz" being generated about artificially "new ideas" like wave piercing hulls (as if all beach cat hulls do NOT pierce waves). So clearly there is at least an attempt in the Formula classs to win with a better design. Meanwhile, some say that the A class is so refined that the design changes are quite small and any speed differences in the boats are either very condition specific or so small as to make racing success completely driver determinant.
<br>
<br>If there are no modifications allowed to boats like the Hobie 18 to race in the Formual 18 class then there will be far fewer boats racing in that group in the U.S., especially initially. The easiest, most effective, and least expensive change is to put a bigger mainsail on the boat. That alone gives it a chance to keep up with the new Formula 18 boat upwind. The spinnaker gear can then be any off-the-shelf gear from a purpose built Formula design so that it is readily available and already meets the class rules.
<br>
<br>I just can't see spending all that money to switch from a Hobie 18, for example, to a Formula 18 just to race in Formula when the boat is not much different. It is the same reason many did not sell there Nacra 6.0s to buy Inter 20s. They are still arguing over which one is faster but there is no doubt which one is more expensive. It just seems to me like if you are going to spend all that money then you ought to get something more advanced; like the Marstrom 18 for example or at least like the Taipan (older design but MUCH lighter and as fast as a 20 footer). Except for the Formula 16 class, the Formula minimum boat weights are set so high as to be an impediment to better boats and weight is becoming a major issue as we all go into and beyond middle age! <br><br>Mystere 6.0. , Mystere 4.3 , 2 Hobie Waves

The whole reason for the F18 to keep the weight at what was then common (180 kg's or above) was to start the class with the older grandfathered designs like Nacra 5.5 (176kg's w/o spi) and Hobie 18's (183 w/o spi) and Dart Hawks (180 kg's with spi.)
<br>
<br>I'm sure that the organizers wanted a ligter class too, but they had already a big task in getting the formula principle of the ground and convince the public that equal racing in it was indeed possible.
<br>
<br>I got lucky in the F16 due to the fact I could find a few lightweight grandfathered boats that I could use to get the class going. All grandfathered boat were near enough to the mathematical funny point of 100 kg's which really opens up up this class to all it flexibility.
<br>
<br>The iF20 was faced with the same problems. When they started there were hardly any lightweight 20 footers. There still aren't. And I must admit that designs like the Taipan 5.7 weren't known at all in EU some 3 to 4 years ago.
<br>
<br>So can we blame these "heavy" F18 and iF20 ? I don't think so. I think especially the F18 did great work on which the F16 can now expand. Without it the F16 class would have been doubtful at best.
<br>
<br>I also think that F18 is misunderstood. The class is setup around 180 kg's and alu mast in order not make older 18 footers absolete overnight. Just convert your N5,5 and TheMightyHobie18 at a very acceptable price and you're in business. Once you start sailing in the top 1/3 of pack consistantly then you want to look around for a purpose build F18. This way the class did really think about all of us normal folk without big bucks and this should be recommended.
<br>
<br>Is the time right to expand the formula to really more optimal designs ? I think so, as long as the formula of formula's (equal performance classes) is satisfied. Without this we'll end up with to many formula classes and will be faced with a splintered scene again. Is the 20 foot range a good starting point ? I fear not, for there aren't really any lightweight 20 footers in the US, so what will you grandfather in to start the class ? Shaving about 5 -10 kg's off doesn't really help.
<br>
<br>There is also another issue you should look at here. When you commit yourself to a 20 ft. long platform than shaving of more than 35 kg's is actually bad designing. For you're wetted surface area won't really decrease and your finess ratio was already small on that 20 ft. platform. Ergo, you may invest alot of time and money in getting this weight reduction only to find that some other parameter is preventing you from really achieving performance gain.
<br>
<br>So if any of you is contemplating a NEW F20 setup I advice you to familiarize yourself with the math and ratios behind the F16 HP class for this the fact that this platform is smaller was very helpfull in actually getting it up to speed with F18. So this being smaller isn't a drawback to had to be overcome but actually an active contributing component.
<br>
<br>Like I said many times before, it is all in the balance between different parameters.
<br>
<br>I suspect that the same principle are active in teh Mystere 4,3 and would make this boat a good choice.
<br>
<br>Wouter
<br><br><br>

Hi Wouter, I appreciate your explanations and the reasoning that went into the various formula classes minimum weights. Not only that, I understand why they went with those weights and agree that it will help get the classes started over here in the U.S., especially. The "trick" will be in knowing when to switch over to a lighter minimum weight so that manufacturers have another incentive to design and build lighter boats. The A class did that and it is a difficult decision but critical to continuing to develop faster designs and keep the class healthy. Obviously the main attribute to speed potential on the A cats is their light weight compared to other 18 foot designs.
<br>
<br>The main reason that I am so interested in light weight in a new boat now is that I just turned 48 and while I am quite fit, very active in racing many different kinds of boats, and am committed to sailing for the rest of my life, I recognize that I can best extend that active sailing age range by putting less strain on my body, especially my back, by getting lighter equipment. The beauty of this reality is that it will also translates directly to higher boat speed as well! Also, I am a much better care taker for my boats after all this experience so I can expect my boat to last a long time.
<br>
<br>So given all that, I am naturally more attracted to the Formula 16 class because I am also one of the few guys left who still races with his wife after all these years and neither one of us weighs much more than we did 25 years ago. Even though we struggled to meet the Hobie 18 minimum crew weight of 295 # and usually carried five pounds in the boat just in case, we also never complained about carrying 20# to race the Mystere 6.0 because we figured that helped in light air and forced us to get better in heavy air to be competitive. So we like sailing the 20 footers but not the manhandling associated with maintenance, rigging, transporting, etc.
<br>
<br>This all boils down to personal preference which is determined by so many things like crew size and weight, discretionary income (M20 is over 20K U.S.), age, experience, level of sailing fanaticism, etc., etc. So I understand the Formula concept, the development boat concept, the reasons for the decisions made, and most of everything else discussed here on the forum. I was only pointing out my preferences in the hope that people would consider boat weights in regards to the Formula classes. If they establish the high minimum weights to get started, that's cool. I just hope they also realize that they should consider that they can (and should) be lowered in the future and that if that change is planned and managed well it could not only be accepted well but also add to the future success of the formula concept. I am just glad that the circumstances allowed the Formula 16 class to do that at the start so that I have a place to start with a new boat!<br><br>Mystere 6.0. , Mystere 4.3 , 2 Hobie Waves

Hello Mike,
<br>
<br>>> The "trick" will be in knowing when to switch over to a lighter minimum weight so that manufacturers have another incentive to design and build lighter boats.
<br>
<br>Indeed !
<br>
<br>>>The main reason that I am so interested in light weight in a new boat now is that I just turned 48 and while I am quite fit, ... I am also one of the few guys left who still races with his wife after all these years.... So we like sailing the 20 footers but not the manhandling associated with maintenance, rigging, transporting, etc.
<br>
<br>
<br>Well, the class was largely born from my own similar frustrations. I'm a young guy (29years) single with just recentky a dedicated crew after my first crew quite after 3 years because his girlfriend lived on the other side of the country.
<br>
<br>I didn't want to give up 2-up sailing but had to have a boat that I could handle on my onw competitively. I'm physcally strong but pushing a P18 or P16 up the hill through the soft beachsand alone was beginning to become tiresome. And I was beginning to dislike the fact that my P16 and I came came in laste verytime even though on handicap we did well.
<br>
<br>Several others in the group have different stories (purchase cost, wish for genakers, etc) but all come together in this new class and there they find that the answer to all of this.
<br>
<br>So I'm sure that all of us truelly understand the benefits of lightweight boats. For tis reason I think that the Glider and Mystere 4,3 aregreat boats too and wrongly looked at as kiddies boats.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>>... my preferences in the hope that people would consider boat weights in regards to the Formula classes. If they establish the high minimum weights to get started, that's cool. I just hope they also realize that they should consider that they can (and should) be lowered in the future and that if that change is planned and managed well it could not only be accepted well but also add to the future success of the formula concept.
<br>
<br>I completely agree. The path I put great faith in is the Formula for formula's concept (closely linked to equal performance classes) where each (new) formula class isdesiged to be equal to the performance of the class above. Just like the F16 HP is equal to F18 (and A-cat) and how the F18 HT is more or less equal to the iF20 in allout performance. This will keep the number of eegatta fleets down and stimulate only a small number of starts. However, Ithink that the lightweight 20 ft .class fall outside the effective scoop.I feel that should be put under the truelly Open Class Racingwithout any rules.
<br>
<br>Why, because I don't really believe in concepts like the M20 and CFR 20 on a broad class basis. Too expensive, too big with respect to (sheet)loads and frankly too little performance increase to warrant these investments.
<br>
<br>To further found my arguments is underline the following
<br>
<br>M20 at 105 kg's (nearly F16 HP weight) and 6,1 mtr.length ahs a wetted surface area withrespect to the F16 HP of 112 % it's increase in sailarea is about 113 %. The produced power is a little bit more due to the much higher mast but this in turn puts the M20 (which is als0 2,6 mtr. wide) at a disadvantage in winds above say 12 knots. The M20 finess ratio (high speed) is rediculously small but so small in comparison to wetted surface that this boats drag over the full speed spectrum is domianted by this surface area which is substantially bigger than F16 HP's.
<br>
<br>I'm not against progressing designs but when designs forget to look at ratios and balances than you'll pay 20 K USD for a boat that in about 50 % of all the regatta's is struggling to fend of 10 K F16 HP's. Why because at 105 kg's and 2,6 mtr. width the M20 shouldn't be 20 ft anymore but more like 18 or 16 foot. Staying at will unbalance the performance determining parameters/ratio's
<br>
<br>It is my fear that this is forgotten in the US F20. It will be clear which tpe of design have my preference but I do realize that trailer width limits for example do very much limit (but indirectly) the performance potential of 20 ft. boats. And US should not choose to leave it's parent iF20 for only 1 or 2 % performance increase, because they wrongly believed they would get 10 % or more. That is just not wise in the long run when more EU builders will produce iF20's and probably no US F20's
<br>
<br>This is more direct towards the F20 formers than you ofcourse.
<br>
<br>>>I am just glad that the circumstances allowed the Formula 16 class to do that at the start so that I have a place to start with a new boat!
<br>
<br>Welcome and I'm at least as glad as you. Sometimes you have to get lucky.
<br>
<br>>>Mystere 6.0. , Mystere 4.3 , 2 Hobie Waves
<br>
<br>Nice collection !
<br>
<br>Me ? Prindle 18 genaker, Prindle 16, F16 HP (mod. Taipan 4.9)
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

Hi Wouter, What modification(s) have you made to your Taipan? I really like that boat - it is really impressive to see a 16 foot boat sail faster than 20 footers. It is a quite an achievement in drag reduction! I will send you details about the 16 footer I am planning when I have more concrete info so that you can give me your performance analysis. The prime ratio I am working with is performance to cost! So it wll likely be the least expensive new 16 footer but probably not the fastest. It had better have the best ratio, though!
<br>Mike <br><br>Mystere 6.0. , Mystere 4.3 , 2 Hobie Waves

Mike,
<br>
<br>You're building that boat out of CONCRETE!?
<br>
<br>-sorry, I couldn't resist.<br><br>[color:blue][b]Jake
<br>[color:blue][b]Nacra 5.2 (2112)
<br>[color:blue][b]Hobie 18 (mutt)

I'm still working out the complete picture but 80 % has been decided.
<br>
<br>CurrentlyI'm really looking at those T-foil pitching resisting rudder of the Stealth F16.
<br>
<br>Go to www.geocities.com/stealthmarine2002
<br>
<br>and take a look for yourself (click through a couple of pages)
<br>
<br>They look pretty cool and the logic behind is so undeniable. John says he has very good experiences with them.
<br>
<br>I sail in chop alot and this could just be the thing to finish it off. To finish them all off.
<br>
<br>About sailing faster than 20 footer, mwhaaah that is maybe a bit to much to ask of the F16 HP. that is when these 20's are carying genakers, if their not than hey ! Bye !
<br>
<br>I'm looking forward to seeing your design.
<br>
<br>My mods : (mostly simple and nearly all Taipan 4.9 class compliant)
<br>
<br>I will tell you in my reply to your mail
<br>
<br>Quick list :
<br>
<br>jib sheeted of forebeam
<br>jib sheet cleat of on luff side of boat.
<br>Elongated jib luff a la Tornado sport and Stealth
<br>Carbon tiller and tiller extension
<br>set and forget positive mast rotator (Yes positive rotator, 75 % sure till some designing to do)
<br>Cascaded downsystem of Cirrus F18
<br>Genaker hound that leaves fully sealed (see article on F16 HP webpage)
<br>Hobie style genakerbag
<br>Hobie masthook system
<br>Pentex sails
<br>mast limited in from of mast fixed to genakerpole instead ofboom (66 % sure)
<br>etc.
<br>
<br>And possibly T-foil rudderblades
<br>
<br>Wouter
<br>
<br><br><br>

Hi Wouter, A couple years ago here, I watched while Jim and Julie Boyer sailed boat for boat against well sailed 20 footers and finished first about half the races, all racing jib and main except for the Inter 20 which was not well sailed as it was new. Then in the Key Largo Steeplechase a couple years ago on the second day on what was mostly a close jib reach, I watched a well sailed Taipan 4.9 sail past many well sailed twenty AND twenty-two footers, including Randy and Cam on the new CFR 20. It was amazing! I was on my ten foot beam Mystere 6.0 flying a hull while trapped out with a heavier crew and they sailed past us through our lee!!! I was (and still am) impressed! As I wrote before, it is an impressively low-drag design, both aerodynamically and hydrodynamically.<br><br>Mystere 6.0. , Mystere 4.3 , 2 Hobie Waves

Mike,
<br>
<br>I was at the same two races and saw the same thing. It was both shocking and amazing. It almost had me crying as they sailed past me at the Steeplechase with me on an I20.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br>H20 #791<br><br>

I believe in giving credit where credit is due,, and I also saw the Taipan do those things in the 1999 Steeplechase,, and that was not the only time.
<br>
<br>Earlier that year, Jim Boyer and his daughter Chris (I believe) dazzled us all at the Hamlin Beach regatta, in medium heavy air. Thier windward performance was very impressive,, and while we were able to recoup on the downwind legs (270sf has to have some +'s), I recall them catching us up on one beat. And instead of embarrasing us by taking us to windward with that sweet little boat,,, they embarrassed us by blowing thru our lee,, and then outpointing us.
<br>
<br>Glen Ashby and Dave Chamberlain might have won on the T5.7, if they had not stopped to wash thier spinnaker. As it was Jim and Chris took the honors. And Bob-O' and I lined up for rides on the Taipan's afterwards.
<br>
<br>BTW,, I suspect that if Jim's daughters ever decide demonstrate what the Taipan 4.9 can do in some of our higher profile events,,,, well, they say that a little humble pie is good for soul !!!
<br>
<br>footnote: There is a T4.9, not owned by a racer, that seems to just sit and bake in the sun all summer,,,,,,, What a crime !<br><br>Keep at least one hull in the air !!!
<br>Alan Maguire

Wouter<br><br>