| Author | Message | ||
     Deborah Davenport New member Username: Ddavenport Post Number: 21 Registered: 04-2001 Rating: N/A |
The blueprint that S2 provided at my request when I purchased hull #115 shows the I measurement as 41.25', as does the S2 brochure from 1986. S2 designed and built Sailin' Shoes as a follow-on to the success of the 7.9m Little Feat. She had won MORC Internationals two years in a row, the first year with the factory team, and the second with an almost entirely true amateur crew (only one sailmaker). Like Little Feat, Sailin' Shoes was built with a vacuum-bag layup, and had an outboard engine. Little Feat had a slightly taller rig than the tall rig 7.9, so it's highly probable that S2 asked G&S for a similar modification from the stock 9.1. Remember, the 9.1's (and the 7.9's) were designed to race under the MORC rule, which allowed and provided for modifications from stock boats -- you took the boat's measurements and the measurer ran them through the formula to compute the rating. Your best source of answers would be the designers, [Scott] Graham & [Eric] Schlageter, but I don't believe that their firm still exists. FYI, when Joe Heslin owned Sailin' Shoes, I gave him photos of your boat that I took at the S2 factory in February or March of 1986. | ||
| Mike Reed New member Username: Mreed112 Post Number: 4 Registered: 01-2001 Rating: N/A |
I checked an old 9.1 brochure I have. While it did not have a dimensioned sail plan, it did say that the SE has an 9" taller mast than the base boat. Since all of the base boats after around hull number 12 had an I dimension of 41' 3", I would assume that your I dimension is 42'. | ||
| Christian Uecker New member Username: Cauecker Post Number: 1 Registered: 08-2003 Rating: N/A |
I have an S2 9.1 SE, hull #114 (Ex Sailin Shoes). Purchased it over last summer and am in the process of purchasing a new LT #1. Does anyone know if the SE had a taller mast. My mast is down and I measured the headstay from Pin to Pin and I got 43'04". This is inconsistent with the length North Sails has on file for other 9.1s. I don't have any head sails that originally belonged to the boat so I can't use them to measure the luff tape. I would appreciate any help I can get in this matter. | ||
| Lance Staughton (Twospeed) Rating: N/A |
I too am confused on the mast height issue. It seems to me that I'm missing a few inches on the top also( or the bottom I suppose). What do other boats have for LLJ( luff length jib). I'm asking max hoist on the center jib halyard. I measuring 41' 8" (another 9.1 uses this as their PHRF size so it may be correct). Lance | ||
| Paul Alexy (Palexy) Rating: N/A |
GOOD NEWS I have the tall rig, but it measures 4or5" short. I messed up when I put the tape to the geni halyard in the dark and forgot that someone had put a block on the front of the mast for the roller furler. This shortened the pin to pin by 9 to 10 inches...I still cant figure out where the rest in. PS I stood the mast up straight and I can't find the lost inches. Paul #127 Impaulsive | ||
| Mike Reed (Mreed112) Rating: N/A |
Info for Scott -- actually Irish Rose was converted to a tall mast shortly after the boat was delivered. The boat was campaigned the first year (1983) by Skip Boston (now Doyle/Boston Sails) on Lake St. Clair. Skip was concerned that the boat was "sticky" in light air. He had Mike Feldman of Offshore Spars build a taller mast, which significantly improved light air performance, as you would expect. Skip's action caused consternation with both S2 and the Designers (G&S). I was stuck in the middle of this since my boat (hull #22) was on order at the time. Not sure of the exact hull # but you are right, S2 was somewhat forced into changing to the taller rig. I think several of the original boats were also retrofitted with the taller rigs. The later SE's had an even taller rig. There was also controversy about the keel. Weight was taken out of the keel with voids at the top which caused a change in the bolt pattern. In an attempt to convince me to buy my sails from him (which worked), Skip took me out for a Saturday race on Irish Rose while I was waiting for my boat to be built. It was a light Saturday afternoon that convinced me of the Skip's wisdom in going to the taller rig. We finished first in class one boat length behind the J29 sailed by the other sail maker I was considering going with. | ||
| Scott Corder (Pastcommodore) Rating: N/A |
This being your fourth 9.1 Meter (if my memory of our many phone conversations serves me well), I find myself chuckling a little as I read your question Paul... so please forgive me. Anyway, your hull is the second to last hull built (128 were manufactured). It would surprise me greatly if your boat had a short rig. Although my notes are at home (I'm out of town on business) it is generally assumed that the first 12-13 boats were equipped with the short rig. As I think I have told you, my hull is #2 (Irish Rose in the original brochure) and was retrofitted with a tall rig during its second season in order to compete at the MORC Championships. All my encounters with owners of other hulls in the "early" numbers indicate that the short rig disappeared around hull #13 in 1983. Again, I would be surprised if a tall rig was delivered on your hull (which I believe was manufactured in 1987, four years later). If you are actually attempting to measure your "I", remember that the dimension does not stop at the cabin top, it continues to where the foredeck would intersect the mast (if no raised cabin top existed). Hope all is well with your latest venture into 9.1 ownership and that Florida is treating you better than the blustery winters of Ohio! | ||
| Paul Alexy (Palexy) Rating: N/A |
When did S2 change the I from 40' to 41.25 I may have an old mast in my boat # 127. What is the PHRF for ther smaller rig Paul Alexy #127 Impaulsive Florida 321 779 4464 |
