Patrick, for what it's worth, and this may not be much, the Lf is a more of a
cruising biased design, and if that's the intended use and safety and
reliability are paramount, and all else is equal, I'd convert to standard,
stranded wire. As to the responsiveness attributed to every C&c yacht ever
made by Brian toss, I can only assume he's thinking high performance/racing not
cruising.
I have a 33-2, safe to say a more racing-oriented design than a landfall, (I
hope so!) and it has rod rigging, but I honestly doubt I'm a good enough
sailor, and demanding enough, and the other aspects of my rig are optimized
enough, that rod vs wire would matter much.
My c$.02....
Dave.
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 14:47:05 -0800
From: Patrick Davin <jda...@gmail.com>
To: "cnc-list@cnc-list.com" <cnc-list@cnc-list.com>
Subject: Re: Stus-List Pointers on re rigging an LF38
Message-ID:
<CAHixY6TxyZwE+s9jroV3wm58x0zri9L3kKtrMVSp=nzyyol...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Ok, I've found out a lot more in the last 3 weeks, but am frustratingly no
closer to making a decision. All I've learned is that Navtec parts are
really expensive and complex. And that everyone I talk to disagrees with
the previous person (ie, even professional riggers don't agree on what is
recommended + safe) - I suppose this is normal in sailing though.
I found a few more old threads from the C&C list:
http://cnc-list.com/pipermail/cnc-list_cnc-list.com/2011-November/041498.html
http://cnc-list.com/pipermail/cnc-list_cnc-list.com/2014-April/066294.html
A lot of it seems to come down to the Navtangs. Navtec changed the design
several times (to make improvements), and Navtec had so much employee
turnover that there's only one guy remaining who has been through all the
iterations.
My previous thinking was based on that my '84 has K150 tangs with SS tie
rods (confirmed by a rigger when we pulled one tang last year). And the
tang was easily unscrewed, which lends me hope the other 3 would also be
similar. So I assumed I could reuse my tangs, because it seems other C&C
owners did so, and last year's rigger said it looked reusable (based on
visual inspection).
However a more conservative rigger basically implied I would be stupid to
reuse it. Navtec recommends replacing them - but Navtec recommends
replacing anything older than 12 years old, so I don't really know what to
make of Navtec's advice (they have no incentive *not* to recommend
replacing their hardware with new hardware of their own).
A local rigger told me the navtangs are $1000 each. I have 4 of them, so
replacing them would basically double the cost of a rerig (and that's not
counting any labor cost). (I think the $1k/each is an overestimate though -
I found a price online of $500-600).
It seems like a lot of people who have rerigged haven't actually done full
rerigs - ie, they reused turnbuckles, or tangs. I do agree with the more
conservative rigger that it doesn't make sense to leave a "weak link" in
the system. But I'm not sure whether old navtangs must be automatically
condemned into the category of being a weak link.
I'm seriously thinking about a wire conversion again, but that has it's own
complications. Has anyone done that on the side shrouds? From archives I
know Calypso did forestay/backstay, but those are easy to convert. The mast
tangs and discontinuous lower spreader junction are the tricky part.
I found a Youtube channel where they replaced their Navtec rig with wire:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVhj714rleQ
But they have a Niagara 35 with a single spreader rig rather than double,
so that makes it a bit simpler. And the well-known rigger Brion Toss has
said (in his forum) that for a C&C, he would stay with rod, because rod
makes a difference to the responsiveness of C&C's.
-Patrick
1984 C&C Landfall 38
Seattle, WA
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
This list is supported by the generous donations of our members. If you wish to
make a contribution to offset our costs, please go to:
https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
All Contributions are greatly appreciated!
