Why is it so wide?

I have exclusivly sailed SMOD's for the past 10 years and had a great time in them. They suit me because I want to have it easy - boat off the shelf and a level playing field.

But, I have also has great sailing in development classes.

I perosnally don't really see the SMOD/dev class divide - I just pick what best suits me at the time

However; seems that the two groups struggle to get along; why is that?

Rick

I think that the playing field is "more" level in SMOD fleets due to the fact the the equipment is the "same".

Of course there are manufacturing differences between components but they are pretty similar.

I choose a SMOD because it's an easier way for me to sail - I don't have to think about equipment; I just buy the standard.

Of couse the design of the boat and the components are a key part of the sport in a dev class it's just that dosn't interest me so much.

I think the cost issue is not a dev/smod thing just a supply and demand issue.

And where do all the classes which are neither (a gut feeling says the majority) fit into all this? Everything from the British Moth to the Flying Dutchman where many builders can try to build a better boat to a more or less strict set of rules?

Do they hardly get a mention on this forum because they are ticking along nicely, or because nobody cares any more?!

I guess that is a fair point; do you think dev classes support a broader weight/height range?

Here

... was about to say (clumsy typer) here is the weight distribution range of the MPS

http://www.mustoskiff.com/facts-and-figures.htm - http://www.mustoskiff.com/facts-and-figures.htm

Quite broad I'd say ...

Rick

The older classes are one designs, but the tolerences tend to be greater, and so the oppotunities for limited development.

On the subject of SMODs, the main difference in speed, barring helming skill, will be the age of the gear and equipment, which in some classes will last less long than in the development classes - the obvious example will be the difference between a new sail and an old one. Certain one design sails appear to need replacing rather more often than would appear necessary, but to change that would undermine the one design nature of a class.

I think really it is about people having different outlooks on the sport and struggling to understand the other point of view.

SMOD's are without doubt less time consuming to sail as there is no real leverage in fiddling with the boat. That suits me.

Some people see the boat fiddling as a big part of the sport and cant understand why people would not want a dev class.

As for cost I think there is no real difference - a SMOD can be grandfathered by a new SMOD - sure. But if someone invents a new I14 hull shape that wins the worlds then the old design hulls suffer the same issue.

So - it's just different - not better not worse just different.

Take your pick but don't look down on the other side.

Rick

Why would they want to do that then?

Not sure that is true, or any truer than saying afficiandos or rival SMODs don't get along.

I've sailed in a restricted (semi-development) class, in an OD class with multiple manufacturers (MMOD?) and I helped run a SMOD class association. While I enjoyed them all, I feel development classes require a wider range of skills, which ultimately is more rewarding.

Isn't that what Bethwaite does with the 49er and 29er

He owns the designs and others build them ...

Rick

The difference between a SMOD and a Dev is obvious!

Steve Irish borrows your RS800 and sails the arse off it for the weekend and wins it loses a little bit of value through wear and tear, whilst if he borrows your Cherub and does the same it appreciates significantly!

Yes but they "push" their product, not the "ruleset". There is a difference. I don't see Winder, for example, promoting Merlins as such, nor would I expect them too.

So he is a designer then, not a manufacturer. The comment was about manufacturers.

When Bethwaite was "building" boats, he was having the "deck" and "hull" delivered to him from "Kulmar Boat Building" to be glued together at Beithwaites with wings also manufactured elsewhere. Poles masts came from a third supplier and the whole thing was assembled at his factory at Brookvale/Manly. He should be called an assembler. This was about 5+ years ago in Australia.

Correct me if I'm wrong but this isn't the 49er mast on its 5th or 6th design. I do remember the 49er mast tips being squashed in a vice to achieve a better bend. IS THIS ONE DESIGN RACING?

SMOD rules can be just plain stupid, J24 rules state, that there must be a sink. It doesn't say anything about the plumbing, therefore serious boats DON'T HAVE PLUMBING.

Theses are two examples of ways around the rules in SMOD classes. If there is then no rule then It cannot be Bent Or Broken by someone with to much time on their hands. Isn't this the complete opposite of the SMOD sailors ethos?

Although I own a 14 now, I'm fairly sure that in the future I will be sailing a SMOD. Dev classes are great for people with loads of time, skills with composites and knowledge. I would love my sailing to be as ‘plug and play’ as possible. I hate working on boats, I’d rather be on the water - it even annoys me that my 14 takes so long to rig. As soon as I get stuck into a career I will have far more disposable income than time and I’d rather have my free time spent sailing than messing around with carbon fibre.

As for racing, I don’t think would ever seriously race a dev class. If I win I want it to be because (as far as possible) it’s because I was a better sailor instead of my skills as a boat designer/builder. The racing in the cherub fleet at the moment sees half the boats essentially uncompetitive due to the 2005 rules change, in an already tiny fleet.

What I’d love to see is an SMOD which allows control runs/lines to be set however the sailors wanted. If I had an RS800 I would mod it with the sheet off the boom since I don’t race.

I believe that any class of dinghy will have a fairly narrow optimum weight range.

I think where the claimed differences come in is actually mostly a result of the competitiveness of a class. The more competitive a class, the narrower the weight range of its successful sailors. Conversely, a less competitive class will enable sailors who are not quite the right size/weight to "get away with it" and be successful in that class.

So when a class claims to have a very large competitive crew weight range, I think it just means the class isn't being sailed that competitively at the moment.

I suspect there is a lot of truth in that.

I can't remember who said Merlins were competitive 18-28 stone but I don't think any close examination of results really bears that out. Top teams have mostly been around 22 stone for quite a while. 

Just looking at the capital cost is misleading. The running costs are not remotely comparable. I speak from experience. 

very much so. In fact its the runnig costs whcih define, and make SMOD's so attractive. You pay your money (the price in the brochure) and you are set with the same/best equipment.....nothing else to buy, no going to bed dreaming 'oh, if I could just afford this' or 'get this' Id be the fastest man on the coast. You can concentrate on sailing and getting yourself to opens.

I'd like to bet that the running costs are in fact no different. We all have to buy new sails, fittings etc, and even occasionally new masts and foils. At the risk of getting shot down in flames, I would think that sails are relatively expensive in SMOD classes, and I'd be interested to know how many SMOD's come fitted with Harken or equivalent quality kit? I don't sail a development class any more, and I have nothing whatsoever against SMOD boats - a good boat is a good boat, wherever it comes from - but I do think the presence of large-scale businesses with big marketing budgets, who put unwanted pressures on the direction taken by what is after all a hobby, is detrimental to our sport and causes unneccessary fragmentation.

Development classes all face the same problem - what do you do when development within the rule is no longer happening? Either you leave it as it is, and become virtually a one-design as may well happen soon to the Merlin Rocket, N12 etc, or you go for a radical change in the rule to kick-start development. Second option has been taken by I14, Cherub etc and brings it's own problems - costs go up, boats become obsolete and second-hand values drop.

If you don't have the time or money to run a development boat - and let's face it, how many I14 sailors actually develop their boats, rather than following someone else's go-fast mod? - then what's wrong with an established one-design? Why is a SMOD cheaper to run than a Fireball, Scorpion, Hornet, etc etc? That's a genuine question, by the way. If someone can give me a reason, I'll happily wind my neck back in. FD's are traditionally viewed as expensive to run, but mine costs in the region of £150 - £200 in maintenance per year, aside from sails, and that spend keeps the boat almost 100% reliable - last time anything broke was July 2002. How does that compare with other people's budget? I'd be interested to hear from SMOD sailors and Development class sailors.

Neil, excellent point. The only money I've spent on my Fireball in the last two years is a fiver for a uv joint for the tiller. This year it will be roughly about the same when the trap elastic gets replaced.

Sails don't count, they are a consumable item for any boat.

ok, I'll take that on board.. however that's where the free market comes into play with sails. If you have multiple sail manufacturers they have to provide not only fast but durable sails. I would argue that there is not the same pressure to do so with a single manufacturer, captive audience and all that...

Depends on how captive. Suppose you were a sailmaker with a nice business of say £100K a year with a SMOD class. You might be pretty motivated to make sure you kept that class association happy IF there was a realistic prospect they might go elsewhere. There is a difference between individual sailors being captive and the class as a whole. Classes may be able to switch sailmaker. It all depends on the status of the class association versus the manufacturer and the attitude of the manufacturer.

SMOD sails can be ridiculously expensive. They can also be cheaper mass-manufactured than you'd get as an individual going to one of several sailmakers, all viewing the sails as semi one-offs. I could point out examples of both. It really depends on where the manufacturer is coming from and how effective the class association can be in sticking up for the sailors' interests.

This is a debate we went through at length when I helped run a SMOD class with a single sailmaker. When you get into the detail, things become a lot more complex than they might initially seem.

Warning: danger of low-flying pigs on both those suggestions.

So tell us Freddie, where in the UK are there fleets of sportsboats kept on moorings? A handful at Burnham. A few J80s scattered around the W country. Why is that then? Well, think anybody wants to buy a sportsboat that has been kept on a mooring? Think in the Solent you can even get a non-tidal swinging mooring without being on the waiting list for years?

You are comparing apples and oranges. Keep a sportsboat on a mooring when everyone else is dry-sailing and all you are going to see is a lot of transoms. The valid comparison with a 505 is local club handicap racing. The comparison with towing a 505 round the country is towing something like a 1720 round the circuit and I promise that doesn't come cheap. 

Having a local fleet and sailing only with that fleet is always going to be cheaper than campaigning a boat around the country.

If I ever worked out how much I spend on going to opens I would probably scare myself into missing a couple  

Then Id realise I hadnt seen some of my sailing mates for a while and was still spending as much on beer and Id bought some new toys to make up for missing the events so I was still skint and next thing Id be back at some event at the other end of the country........

The second hand values have gone up because people are converting the older hulls to take the new 2005 rules rigs. This works well because even hulls built in the 80's are still stiff and with care can be kept down to weight. 

I don't know how competitive a 1980's GRP hull would be in any class. I suspect it would have gone soft by now.

Because customers want it, or at least the members of the class association I helped run certainly did. How did we know what durability problems there were? Oddly enough, we talked to each other. In fact as a class association, we collated reports from members which we fed back to the sailmaker.

Yes, we are agreed on that.

if ( previewPost.isClicked ) probability( rubbishProduced ) < likely 

Sorry but I haven't a clue what you mean. You were telling us how cheap sportsboats were. Now you seemed to have gone off on another tangent altogether.