Thanks for the measurements, Tod. I would be removing 3" of the 12" chord (leading edge to trailing edge) at the top of the balanced section (about 25%), and about 2" of the 10" chord at the tip (about 20%). A fairly substantial amount of the below waterline area. I don't think I'll do it. It's too sweet of a rudder to mess it up. It's just going to take a lot of finish work to rebuild it, because of some warping caused by the moisture that got in. I think I'll see if Ida Sailor will build me a balanced kick-up rudder and keep this one stock.
Larry On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:52:54 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Larry, > > I think Busca's submerged part of the rudder is very close to 11" > longitudinally and 3' vertically. > > I wouldn't worry about losing 2" (I think that was the figure) > UNLESS you > have some spare change laying around that you are dying to spend or > UNLESS > you are the sort who loves performance. There is probably a slight > loss of > performance but probably a lot of sailors wouldn't notice it. > > The good thing is that the depth is the same. Loss of rudder area > while > maintaining depth has a smaller effect than if you had just trimmed > that > same amount of area off the bottom of the rudder. > > I had trimmed quite a bit off the bottom of Busca's original rudder, > maybe > 9" or so, and the effect there was very noticeable (25% loss of > area). > > Tod > > > _______________________________________________ > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > > _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats
