Halsey Hershoff and the Chryslers...

Papax3 · Post by **Papax3** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:52 pm

Guess the title of this topic sounds an awful lot like a rock band

This ought to be a fun one:
Halsey Hershoff designed the Chryslers... It is, I think, accurate to say that he designed them for coastal waters. If that much is right... then I'd like to ask an inlander's question: for those ripping it up in coastal waters, are there obvious benefits to his design? In other words, did it work? Heavy Keel (good ballast), beefy mast (no broken masts), high aspect-ratio sail (beneficial for ocean winds?). The reason I ask these questions ~besides celebrating our boats~ is that I'm curious and cautious about taking my 1977, 22' swing-keel out on the big pond. It's older, and it doesn't meet the 30' for ocean going that I've heard so much about. Anybody cross the big pond, or take a big leap across the gulf in their 22? 26? 30?
Very curious...
~signed Thor Heyerdahl~
Ha!
Bill Williams

lecker68 · Post by **lecker68** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:59 pm

Bill if you check on trans Atlantic you will find quite a few were in boats smaller than 20'. another forum that a few of us here belong to is www.sailfar.net and that is all about the smaller cruising sailors with boats in our range you have to watch your weather window.

back2class · Post by **back2class** » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:02 pm

I do think it is odd that this boat seems overbuilt for the intended use. From what little I could see it seems like a very nice setup for short offshore trips if you wish to do so in a little boat. I sure wouldn't even consider it anything but stupid to be out more than a few miles in a swing keel boat like the 22. The fixed keel I would go short trips offshore with a clear weather window. Like Miami to Bahamas. Perhaps some full keel drop centers like the Tartans, but the 22 is not that.
It is rather overbuilt and I like that. But that keel makes it a lake or close to shore boat. Kind of like putting 13' wheels on a Vette.

Windward · Post by **Windward** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:53 am

Conventional wisdom has it that an offshore boat should have a capsize ratio of less than 2 (visit http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html and see that the C22 has a ratio of 2.15), but like so many other rules of thumb, it's not gospel. The trick is just to avoid inversion

The Chrysler is tough, but by no means overbuilt, and a swing keel that's heavily ballasted is certainly not ideal for offshore work. The rudder's a real vulnerability, the hull/deck joint is sketchy, the interior bulkheads are a joke, and the huge companionway hatch ain't what you want in large seas. The 26 is very sea kindly and inspires confidence, even with a swing keel, and I'd love a fixed keel C26 for extended voyaging, but expending the time and money to make her truly bombproof would be a decision of my heart and contrarian nature, not my head.

All that said, with the proper skill set, reinforcement, preparation, equipment, contingency planning, skill set (twice, because next to luck it's probably the most important), weather window and a huge dollop of good fortune, there's no reason you couldn't take a C22 or 26 a long, long ways.

Someone sailed a West Wight Potter 19 from California to Hawaii, and a Bristol 22 (another Herreshoff design) was cruised for four years from the US west coast to Australia and back at least to Hawaii, perhaps further.

For closer-to-home inspiration, search the forum archives here for tales of the C22 Sula http://www.sailblogs.com/member/sula/ and of the C26 (yay!) Haboob http://quebec-bahamas.blogspot.com/ and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00GiqgBt ... re=channel

NYCSAILOR · Post by **NYCSAILOR** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:35 am

In a very intelligent way, Jeff spelled it out...

In any event, you would have to be a VERY skilled expereinced marier to get it done safely as the c-22 would not be very forgiving and give you a big safety margin for inexperience...

Jeff,
great web site... I see the C-26 has a capsize of 1.86 -- very good , and it does not specify if that is the fixed keel or swing keel!

but even the c-26 is a high volume manufactured boat built and designed to a consumer mass market price point and it shows... bulkheads are a joke, chainplates are downright scary, compression post - you kinda just shakeyour head-- and so on.

if you really want a blue water boat... I would have to say your value and money would go further on fixing up an old pearson or better quality built boat of the same vintage...

Chrysler advantages... trailer, cheap, ez to fix-up modernize and operate, good looking, great cabin room for its class , ez to maintain...good reputation, ACTIVE FLEET AND FORUM, ( not to mention the greatest owners !)

all very good attributes for the uses we typically put our boats through...

Holiday · Post by **Holiday** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 11:04 am

There was a Chrysler 26 in the first Single Handed Trans Pac according to thier website. It did not finish within the allotted time, so it's finish is not recorded.

NYCSAILOR · Post by **NYCSAILOR** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 11:28 am

holiday...very interesting info....

If I was single - handling across the pond... the c-26 with it's narrow beam would be one wet ride...

There is a documented journey of a canadian sailor of our fleet that sailed to cuba, in a swing keel no less and I think Jeff has a link to his website... great footage of a c-26 in bluewater action...

Alanhod · Post by **Alanhod** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 1:13 pm

Last summer there was a guy here on the forum that sailed the Sea of Cortez in a C-22 for some college project he was working on. He documented the whole thing on this forum and a blog. Then he sold the boat when he was done to pay for school.

Thanks
Alan

P.S. yes I like the Rock band idea...Halsey Hershoff and the Chrysler's...Now playing at the Rusty Keel. I'd buy tickets.

KeyWest · Post by **KeyWest** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 1:19 pm

Dumb question: What's a chainplate? Is that a plate that holds the cleats on the deck? Why are they a joke? What can one do about them?

Can you explain some of those other things you said were a joke? I know my mast sits on a post, that looks very slightly off kilter (twisted horizontally) on its seat on the cabin sole.

Alanhod · Post by **Alanhod** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 1:43 pm

KeyWest wrote:Dumb question: What's a chainplate? Is that a plate that holds the cleats on the deck? Why are they a joke? What can one do about them?

Chainplate or in my mind I always thought it was chinplate but chainplate makes more sense.

As I understand it the chainplate is the attach points for the standing rigging. Those stainless cables coming down from the top of the mast attaching to the deck or sides of the boat. (Others please correct me if I'm wrong here.)

As for being a joke, I take the word of the hard core sailors on this forum. I have seen several threads on this forum where people have done significant upgrades to the strengthening, beefing up, completely redoing the chainplates with some fancy stainless replacements going right through the inside of the deck to the cabin, right on through the hull to be bolted on. Big stainless steal straps, bolts and fiberglassing. Then they would completely rebuild there interiors right over the top of the reinforcing to make it all look good again.

Basically they do this to keep the mast from being ripped off in a big blow of bad weather. That is a lot of side force on a very tall mast with some very large sails should a 50 knot gust of wind hit you on a beam reach out in the briny deep.

Thanks
Alan

KeyWest · Post by **KeyWest** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 3:03 pm

But the mast is rather small for the size of the boat, isn't it? Why is that a good thing? Why were they designed that way?

Alanhod · Post by **Alanhod** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 9:58 pm

I never thought of our masts being too small in proportion to the rest of the boat. I have a 22 foot boat and a 26.5 foot mast. Seems to me to be the approximate ratio of every sailboat to mast I ever sailed on. Now I know there was a C-22 that shipped with a 29 foot mast that I read about somewhere. I think that boat also only came in a fixed keel, but I may be confusing things here.

In the same line of thinking, more sail does not mean sailing faster. In some cases less sail mean you sail faster.

When it comes on to blow, the mast is plenty big enough. I've had some big 25 knot gusts and it was plenty of mast. Also in light airs the sail area has been quite excellent.

A C-26 seems to me from the drawings and photos I've seen to mostly be a bigger version of my C-22 proportion wise.

No the reason I would want to redo the chainplate on a C-26 is because I would take it out farther from the coast in to the edges of real Ocean where things need to be built much stronger. The farther you get from shore the more you must depend on yourself and your equipment. The Sea Scouts, Vessel Assist and the US Coast Guard take a lot longer to come out and save you then when your just hanging out in the bay. Loose sight of land and your sailing skills and boat better be top notch in my opinion.

My C-22 and I will be well within sight of land at all times. Fog being teh exception but I will be beating feet back to port if I see or hear of fog headed my way. Now a C-26 and a lot more skill, yea I'd go out of sight of land. No Ocean Crossing but I'd take it round say Vancouver Island (Canada) or do the inside passage to Alaska. Again, just my opinion.

Thanks
Alan