Jake sez:
"You create a serious "rule beater" by applying the handicap this way. Realistically, this boat should only be a little slower than an F18 and it's rating should reflect that. By applying the rule as you have, you've given this boat a barely sub 70 rating while an F18 is 62.5. This boat would be impossible to beat under handicap by anything with a realistic rating. Even adding the full extent of mods to the regular Hobie 18 rating still looks a little soft but is certainly closer."

______________

I'm OSYC's PSVB (scorer) and I'd have to agree with Jake here. I don't think anyone is taking hull weights into account, though.

I should think that the 18/Magnum rating is pretty well established since the 'original' 18 has been around for some time. The 18sx is much newer, and fewer of them around, so I'd be disinclined to trust the number as compared to the stock 18 rating.

The 18SX, being a newer boat, prolly has much lighter hulls, too, and of course weight is a big factor.

As far as I'm concerned, I believe that the -platform- is what the boat is, not its -rig-. Using Keith's logic, one could take a set of NACRA 5.5 hulls and add a Hobie 18SX rig and take the SX rating. Now wouldn't THAT be a rule beater?

What is definitely apparent from this debate is that the Ports. ratings are being applied in quite a subjective way, but then so is PHRF, but that's another argument. ;-)

And Keith, about my F27GS? I start with the Formula rating, and take hits for bigger sails, rotating mast, taller stick, lightened/reshaped hulls, and modified rudder, I guess. I haven't worked out Ports. yet, oi...

sea ya
tami