Wouter,
You abused what I said here and misused the information I supplied and I do not appreciate it.
I addressed hull weight only and scaled hull weight only with the LWL**3 relationship. My objective was to show interested sailors that the manufacturing method/process of the RC30 hull is outstandingly low in weight and by scaling a finished RC30 hull weight at 30ft down to 20ft and 18ft you arrive at hull weights equal to or better that anything else available anywhere in the world.
The rest of the RC30/27 parts like, beams, tramps, rigging wires, rudderheads, ropes, blocks, etc. are not outstanding in minimum weight because they are plain old aluminum and dacrom and 316 stainless and plastic etc. so they are not superlight as the hulls are. That is why these parts are not outstandingly low in weight. Well, 'why not', you might ask? COST!!! I still have appreciation for the customer. I'm sure at least 100 pounds could be taken out of the weight of a RC27/30. And guess what? IT WOULD DOUBLE THE PRICE OF THE BOAT!!! Tom Haberman and I don't think it is the thing to do. It is the same situation on the ARC22. It could be lighter also. The ARC27/30 and 22 hull weights are outstanding in construction method and weight; today's technology. The rest of the boat is 1960's technology as far as construction method and weights go. This is why what you did with the total boat weight scaling is misleading to other readers. You mixed apples and oranges and you didn't know you were doing that; but you did know that you wanted to make the RC hull weight numbers look highly questionable if not unbelieveable, "a bit much don't you think'?
Bill