Round Ireland Race

[PhatFrank]

Originally Posted by Scand

What's the change for the goldfish 36 then?

Nothing, which is exactly my point. It's the rules that have changed. Apparently it was either too flimsy, too fast or too expensive. As for the "if it ain't broke, then don't fix it" argument, I'd claim that this could be said about the rules from RB08.

My suggestion (if it is possible) would be to keep the rules for the UK Marathon Series, but to make changes to the rules for international events such as RB and RI. 99,9% of the rules are great - simply remove the weight restrictions – at least for the bigger classes - altogether. I just can’t see any good reason for keeping them, and the latest withdrawals from RI shows that we need all the boats we can gather to make these events happen.

As for the “Golden-fishboys” comment about the extra weight; first of all, this discussion is not about Goldfish. We’ve sold the 29, and are looking at options for a new boat. What we want is something very light around 45 – 50 feet with twin diesels. Our target weight means we would need to add around 1 000 kg of ballast to compete, and anyone will tell you (just ask Dean regarding his Fountain) that adding this much ballast to a light design seriously compromises the handling, stability, speed and fuel consumption. It’s 2010, and using the newest build and engine technology shouldn’t result in needing to fill the boat with a metric ton of bricks to compete. It is inefficient, unnecessary and a complete waste.

Like it or not, the environmental aspects of racing needs to be addressed, and the increasing pressure from “green” organizations and governmental regulations means that we should do what we can to improve efficiency and reduce emissions from our boats. Heck, I’d even vote for a “least amount of fuel used” prize. It’s easy to dismiss this argument as a “tree hugger” ideology, but I think a lot of potential racers are concerned about this issue. The simple fact is that most people view offshore racing as a gas-guzzling, rainforest-burning sport, and I think removing the possibility for light, fuel efficient boats will be the final nail in the proverbial coffin.

This may seem like a slightly exaggerated argument, but remember that the RB events should – and need to – attract international teams. The costs involved in preparing, transporting and running a front- running boat will always be very high for foreign competitors, and the build costs for a lightweight yet strong boat can be offset by vastly reduced fuel costs and entry fees and increased residual value. And – at least for some of us – the environmental issues will be more and more important…

So come on – allow lighter boats in the bigger events. We’ll get much more beating in the rough stuff, but if we’re willing to sacrifice our backs and knees to move things forward then let us.

[FLYING FISH]

As you say `cookee` achieving 2.5t with the diesels will be going some.For what it`s worth an Avenger 34 (Tigershark) bare hull and deck came out at 960kg,and I would think the depth of the hull would be more than your craft.That was non exotic build.As you say,stick a couple of petrols in it and compare with the U.S. style lightweight build,and the magic word `ballast`is uttered.
It does seem rather bizarre that U.S. production boats can now trounce the one time kings of offshore racing.It could have happened years ago,but it`s only when Dean`s boat appeared,it was rammed down our throats,and then look at `Blast Off`,whipping the arse of the rest of the field in the CTC.
There has been this gap in years when no real UK contenders have been built and with no races to aim at,and it`s only now we see diesel boats being built and have yet to see a real whizzer i.e.light but strong,petrol powered .Like it or not,we all like to see a glamour boat in the ranks.Wonder if `Aquamania` from the U.S. could try their hand, just to annoy the rulemakers.There `s another dirty word `Turbine`.

[Jon Fuller]

just looked at the Goldfish website. according to that , the 36 Supersport has a minimum production weight of 3200 kilos.

As it has non std Yanmars, i'm assuming it would fall into C-Sport class.

I'm also assuming that the 11.2 metre length will come out at something like 10 metre UIM measurement.

C-sport has a minimum weight of 328kilos/metre, so it will have to weigh 3280 kilos, or 80 kilos over what the site says is its min production weight. add liferaft, safety kit, residual fuel etc, it will i'm sure exceed 3280 kilos. So, Am I missing something? where is the problem???

Why is everyone so hung up about these weight rules being unfair / outdated? It seems to me that the Fountain fits, it just needs suitable motors (Blast Off does after all) , the Goldfish fits, Cinzano fits, swipes fits, and in an unprecedented move considering the current financial climate, 3 people/teams have invested in brand new design/builds for Marathon. How many other classes can boast that level of interest/commitment? This says to me the class & its rules cannot be far out of kilter. Bananashark, Boss & Ring are all happy to build top the rules and its weight limits.

Dean, if you'd bought that Fountain with Mercruiser 1200's, would you still think it should be allowed to run in class, just because it exists (this seems to be the thinking from some) coz I don't! B class was intended for boats like that, with appropriate power. A class is aimed at much bigger stuff, multi engine etc. The min weight is admittedly set with diesels in mind for A class, but it has aleady been reduced once to increase the catchment and I personally don't think it should be reduced further. However, I'm nothing to do with the rules anymore, so it's just that, an opinion.

[Mike Ring]

Originally Posted by Jon Fuller

Wise words. And, without having to bust the bank in the build.

And a boatbuilders view.



More wise words, from another boatbuilder, who's seen and done way more than most, and seen all this before!

Any advance on two boatbuilders?....Mike??

Going with ultra expensive "Modern" materials may make a more efficient hull as far as speed and performance is concerned.

But if we are going down the leanest, meanest ,fittest route to fuel efficiency then that will mean cheque book racing. In my opinion this has certainly killed off more than one form of racing boats.

I understood that marathon was meant to be a class that could allow production and standard build boats an equal chance to take the honours.
If this class was intended for out and out single purpose racing craft only, that stood a chance of honours I would certrainly not be spending what to me is a small fortune on tooling in this financial climate.

The type of materials and techniques that we now use with stitched rovings,honeycombe, plastics , foam and extrusions are far lighter and stronger than a decade ago but still at a reasonable cost to the client who has to buy the boat and run it.

Keep it inexpensive and keep the entries.

If we let a class of Hi tek expensive boats head the series and steal the glory as they surely will then the lower pecking order will soon be dropping off the radar. Every entrant must be made to feel 'special' and important or they will soon drop out.


Those that want a Grand Prix class at astro costs please get together and form one , I for one would love to see it , but at GP meetings only .

Just my opinion for what its worth from a designer/builders point of view. Now I need that drink !!!

[Jim Brooker]

Originally Posted by FLYING FISH

As you say `cookee` achieving 2.5t with the diesels will be going some.For what it`s worth an Avenger 34 (Tigershark) bare hull and deck came out at 960kg,and I would think the depth of the hull would be more than your craft.That was non exotic build.As you say,stick a couple of petrols in it and compare with the U.S. style lightweight build,and the magic word `ballast`is uttered.
It does seem rather bizarre that U.S. production boats can now trounce the one time kings of offshore racing.It could have happened years ago,but it`s only when Dean`s boat appeared,it was rammed down our throats,and then look at `Blast Off`,whipping the arse of the rest of the field in the CTC.
There has been this gap in years when no real UK contenders have been built and with no races to aim at,and it`s only now we see diesel boats being built and have yet to see a real whizzer i.e.light but strong,petrol powered .Like it or not,we all like to see a glamour boat in the ranks.Wonder if `Aquamania` from the U.S. could try their hand, just to annoy the rulemakers.There `s another dirty word `Turbine`.

Yes I agree with Graham and Jon last thread, being an old rigger and racer I don't think most people in this sport reallied how light some of the old hulls and boats were, for me it's all down to getting the balance right, not how light or heavy the boat is.
Stop worrying about how light your boats are and race the bloody thing's.

[PhatFrank]

Originally Posted by Jon Fuller

just looked at the Goldfish website. according to that , the 36 has a minimum production weight of 3200 kilos.

As it has non std Yanmars, i'm assuming it would fall into C-Sport class.

I'm also assuming that the 11.2 metre length will come out at something like 10 metre UIM measurement.

C-sport has a minimum weight of 328kilos/metre, so it will have to weigh 3280 kilos, or 80 kilos over what the site says is its min production weight. add liferaft, safety kit, residual fuel etc, it will i'm sure exceed 3280 kilos. So, Am I missing something? where is the problem???

I don't remember the exact UIM length, but I think the new boats (they've added an extra foot of length to the waterline) have an UIM length of around 10,5 meters. The carbon build boats weigh 3000 kg fully prep'ed, so you'd still need to add around 450 kgs...

[PhatFrank]

Originally Posted by Mike Ring

If we let a class of Hi tek expensive boats head the series and steal the glory as they surely will then the lower pecking order will soon be dropping off the radar. Every entrant must be made to feel 'special' and important or they will soon drop out.

I see your point, but this will happen with or without lighter boats. In RB08, for example, no-one paid any attention to the "smaller" classes. Heck, even the official video didn't mention any of the class winners, only the overall winner (a bit sore, am I ?). The front runners in the bigger events will always be expensive, high budget boats - if anything, lighter "front runners" will reduce entry fees & fuel costs.

That drink does sound good...

[Scand]

Could you run it in the C sport class, 10.5 meter = 2940kg?
Or stick some 350hk 4.2l CMD's in it and run it the D class at 2750kg?
I guess the CMD's being commenrail can be chipped and still comply with the rules?

[Jon Fuller]

Originally Posted by PhatFrank

you'd still need to add around 450 kgs...

You said 700 kilos a minute ago!!!

Add Liferaft, safety kit, larger tanks, residual fuel and in reality, probably 100 kilos needed, or one person!

Stop moaning. there are more important things to worry about. And this particular boat is very hi-tech and is an extreme example. the rules fit fine for most.

All this arguing is VERY obstructive to the building of Marathon as a series, please lets move on.

[FLYING FISH]

Going on from Mike Ring`s comments,which are all valid,word`s like expensive,hi tech,cheque book racing will always raise the arms.When you consider someone who is deciding what to go for,other than the more recent UK builds that are in process,you would be hard pushed to find a reasonably up to date build that is UK produced,so where to do you look,the U.S. as Dean has already commented on re reasonably priced,but then they are lightweight build.Other than `Blast Off`most hardboat petrol inboards are fitted into older construction boats,and hence fit the rules,as does diesel power with their heavier weight.I`m still intrigued to know how close that boat is to the minimum wt.

Surely anybody who can obtain a reasonably priced boat,albeit of later construction and lighter weight with petrols,have a right to their opinion without being dismissed as upsetting the apple cart.This business of a rule change ending in umpteen classes,to me seems most odd.

In the past the whole CTC fleet was broken up into 4 classes.Now I know a lot of those boats would not meet todays rules especially with the way safety has more of a bearing.

At the end of day,todays rules will change,maybe not right away,everything does,so why not take on board what is said rather than go all defensive,Sure we need stability, but isn`t it common sense to log it ,so in a few years time the rules can be re-assessed and a time scale given for rule changes.Blimey, F1 does it.

[Cookee]

For What it's worth I actually agree with Mike (Ring) on this - I don't need the expense of building a Kevlar or Carbon boat to keep up, and I want to sell some more boats and the best way to do that is keep the price down - P1 or whatever it's called this week has the Hi tech route and Marathon doesn't - I think that is a great balance!

[Jon Fuller]

Originally Posted by FLYING FISH

the U.S. as Dean has already commented on re reasonably priced,but then they are lightweight build.

But Graham, Deans boat is absolutely fine if it were placed where nature intended it, class B. it only has a problem because the supercharged engines currently fitted take it up a class to A, where the min weight per metre is higher.

There must be feckin hundreds of them Fountains in the US with the right type of motor to come & race in B class, so these rules do not stifle the use of US boats, Dean just has the wrong motors.

It gauls me that a request for reduced min weight comes from a competitor refering to a boat that is about as high tech as they come (carbon etc) where they want the rules changed to include this craft, effectively setting the bar at that level, so everyone has to compete, at that level. Marathon was not supposed to be like that, as Mike Ring said.
Its the same old thing, "my boat is 'X', why can't the rules be changed to suit me".

Right, that's me done, it's pointless going round in continual circles. I've made my point and feelings known. If the rules get changed (already!) so be it, but I guarantee there will be people who are seriously pissed off, and it would likely start with Nick & I, mike ring, Robin Hyde, and plenty others. I'm certain that if the min weight was reduced for E, making it more advantageous to run a sprint boat, Swipes would not see another start flag, and it wouldn't be alone.

[Mike Ring]

[
Its the same old thing, "my boat is 'X', why can't the rules be changed to suit me".

To me it is quite simple,

If the essence of the class in our case is not to use highly strung trick and expensive motors and if that rule is accepted happily by all entrants so far , why on earth should we build trick hulls at greatly increased cost ?

Ok , perhaps we should start discussing fine tuning the rules now for implicating in say five years time to allow for manufacturers engine developments, government interference etc to filter through in due course , but still with affordable costs in mind.


Mike

[FLYING FISH]

What you need in class `E`Jon,is a nice little 30ft U.S. Phantom with a single 525 to pass you at Portland on it`s way back as your smashing you way down to Torquay.That could be an interesting thread on Boatmad.I`ll leave you in peace to progress with the film transfers now.
Of course a hole would have to be cut in the canopy,but that`s another story.

[Jon Fuller]

Originally Posted by FLYING FISH

Of course a hole would have to be cut in the canopy,but that`s another story.

Not to mention sleeving down the engine by nearly 2 litres and throwing away the illegal exhaust headers, but nowt a bit of 'flexibility' wouldn't sort. While we're at it, lets make that 525 a 600 blower motor, they're more lazy.

[cfun]

Out of interest without intending to start an argument, I assume through some observations the Fountain would have to weigh in at something like 5000-5300KG for A class with Merc 600's, and I note on the Fountain web site they state the 42' Lightning version as 11,400 lbs.* / 5,182kgs with 2x525 and a speed of 88mph, although how this differs in drive height and set up is uncertain, however it does show a Fountain 42' hull with over 5000KG running fine albeit not the Poker run edition, which would indicate if the boat were able to be set up as such with the 600's it would no doubt have a speed around the low to mid 90's, although to me one puzzling part of the equation would be the fact I gather the Fountain with the 525's and at it's previous Marathon weight ran well and into the Mid 90's, so their would be no real difference in speed even if the boat were to be able to accommodate the extra ballast, and even in the EX P1 evolution ( HI TECH) rules it would weigh in at 4200KG

However like others I enjoyed watching the Fountain and hope Dean brings it out again, and it would certainly go nicely in the coming Cancer Research bash

[Mike Lloyd]

I’m fascinated with the passion of this argument but it rings warning bells from the “Cruiser” days of the ‘80’s which those of a certain age can remember with some pain! As an instance, the continuing change in rules in those days was the primary reason for me having to change boats four times in seven years until I ran out of money and interest, and I wasn't the only one!!!!!! Be warned.

May I suggest that as much as you all would wish to argue this forever that this is left to another day? Let’s get this year’s racing over first because nothing should or even could be changed now.
ML.
.

[OCRDA]

So how many Marathon boats are going to Ireland ?? and then presumably similar fleet for Harwich !! from the previous posts there must be 50 plus !!

[Jon Fuller]

Originally Posted by cfun

I note on the Fountain web site they state the 42' Lightning version as 11,400 lbs.* / 5,182kgs with 2x525 and a speed of 88mph, although how this differs in drive height and set up is uncertain, however it does show a Fountain 42' hull with over 5000KG running fine

Without being too accusing, all this talk about adding 700kg, or even 1000kg making a 40' boat dangerous, is I believe utter bollox. The one good thing about having to add weight is that you can add it where you choose, and distribute it as you choose. Yes, one, 1000kg lump of lead might cause unwanted local stressing to structures, but added around the boat, low down, and in such a way as to maintain the CofG aint, in my opinion gonna cause any danger or bad characteristics, it'll just slow things down a bit (as intended).

Sure, if you stick it all in the nose, or hanging off the transom, or way up high.....but why would anyone do that? (other than to try and 'make a point').

In short, I believe this argument for keeping their lightweight setup is somewhat convenient to their cause.

Playing the 'safety card' is just as shitty as playing the 'race card' in my opinion. "You're putting me in harms way!" and "Is it coz I is black?" are from the same language.

As Jimmy Brooker says, are the current flock of boats REALLY that much lighter than yester-years? I aint so sure, bring on the load cell I say, lets see if all those people who think they have a featherlight boat are being realistic, or just kidding themselves.

Honey Party was clearly pretty light, as were a good few P1 craft, but then Hledin had forgotten to put half the structures in, and it, along with plenty of P1's fleet were doing substantial structural repaires after every lumpy race, and in some cases, boats were virtually broken in half (honey party).
We wanted to encourage the mindset that spending fortunes in the pursuit of lightness wasn't the way forward in Marathon and a hull & structures that can do a 1500 mile event without repaires is a good thing.

[Jon Fuller]

Originally Posted by OCRDA

So how many Marathon boats are going to Ireland ?? and then presumably similar fleet for Harwich !! from the previous posts there must be 50 plus !!

I'm not sure Ireland is a good example Bob.

In fact, with all the current uncertainty with respect to calendar fees, licences, etc, etc, etc, I don't think there is such a thing as a good example right now.

Harwich will I think be a better litmus test. At least I hope so,