Windpilot windvanes

[Bob Schwartz]

I am thinking of getting a Windpilot Pacific for my CD-27. Does anyone have experience with Windpilots? What mounting kit did you use?. Any problems installing?

Thanks in advance for your input

Bob Schwartz
Longshot
CD-27

[s.v. LaVida]

After extensive research (located somewhere in the archives) and IMHO I found the Monitor to be a better value.

Which ever you choose you'll find a new life away from the tiller! Enjoy.

Mike
LaVida
CD33

[Matt Cawthorne]

Bob,
I have a windpilot on my 36. I could not bear the thought of a monitor vane because of all of the mounting mess. It looks like a junkyard on the back of the boat. I was initially disappointed with the light air performance until I checked with other users of pendulum self steering devices. Apparently it works as well as any other. Then I went to work and made a light air vane that was larger out of a very lightweight material and a counterweight for the linkage and am pleased with the light air performance. The angle of the CD transoms make the stock mounting unacceptable. You have to buy one of their adapter flanges or make accommodations in the form of some spacers. I did the latter and am very happy. Later I added a bimini and it messes its ability to steer somewhat. I intend to move the vane itself higher by extending the vertical support tube to get it clear of the bimini.

[len]

bob

i love my monitor and don't thnk it looks like a junkyard - once you have sailed with a vane, you won't want to sail without one -

len

[John Vigor]

Bob, I bought a Windpilot Pacific for my CD27 a few weeks ago. I had been thinking about it for a long time and then decided I'd better grit my teeth and get one before the dollar drops any further.

I haven't installed it yet but I can already see a problem. If you take a careful look inside your stern lazarette you'll see a curious fiberglass web-like structure plumb in the middle at the top. I presume it has something to do with spreading the stresses of the backstay. But it happens to be exactly where you want to bolt the Windpilot on.

I have widened the Windpilot's transom fitting by 1 1/2 inches, so the top two bolts now fit outside (on either side of) that fiberglass web, but I haven't gotten any further with it at this stage. A simple stainless steel fabrication on the transom could solve this problem and probably look a lot neater, but I haven't investigated far enough yet.

I have had a lot of experience with the Aries, and actually bought one. But I found it was simply too big and clunky for everyday use on the CD27, and the simple way of fitting it--two straight pipes protruding at deck level aft from the transom--would render the lazarette hatch inoperable.

The Aries' installed weight is 77 pounds, which I thought too much for the stern of a 27-footer. The Monitor is still too much at 62 pounds. The Windpilot Pacific (not the Windpilot Pacific Light, which is too small for the CD27) weighs just 44 pounds and is superbly engineered of the highest-grade aluminum alloy.

The other big advantage of the Windpilot for coastal cruisers is that you can lift the servo oar out of the water very easily. It simply swivels to a near upright position. It also comes with a very extensive set of deck fittings, tools and literature, including Peter Forthmann's book, Self-Steering Under Sail, which examines all the different kinds of wind vanes.

No vane gear is particularly good in very light weather, but an extra-large vane certainly does help, as long as it's the same weight as the original vane. You need about 5 knots of wind over the vane to make it work properly. So if you're doing 2 knots downwind in a wind of 6 knots, it won't work well. But as soon as the wind gets up to 8 or 10 knots, you're in business. And what a blessing it is.

In light weather I simply plug in my cockpit autopilot instead. That steers beautifully downwind in ultralight weather, and takes very little juice out of the battery because it hardly has any work to do.

If anyone has already installed a Windpilot Pacific on a CD27 I'd like to hear how they did it.

John Vigor
CD27 "Sangoma"
Bellingham, WA

[s.v. LaVida]

In support of what the other members say about windvanes, my choice was made for personal reasons.

I actually worked closely with the Windpilot folks during my evaluation. At the time, their company was undergoing some upheavals and I wasn't comfortable with their product support. Hopefully its changes in the ensuing years and if so I think they make a great product.

In my evaluation, I was looking for the complete package. Quality and service. Scanmar has supported their product to the very highest of standards and then some.

With all due respect to our boardmember, I DO NOT think my Monitor is a "junkyard" on the back of my boat. It is a very functional piece of gear that does what it does with superb execution.

With almost 30,000nm on it I wouldn't trade "Windy" for any other piece of gear.

The main idea is put a suitable vane on your boat, any vane, and your sailing life will change forever.

Mike
s.v.LaVida
CD33

[ricks]

I don't see any mention made of the Navik? I have followed other threads that did, but why is this not being considered as a lower weight, lower cost solution?

[barfwinkle]

Kerry Deare will weigh in on this one if he is around.

[Bob Schwartz]

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful replies. What makes this board great is the willingness of members to share their experiences, so that those of us who have not been there do not go blindly forward. No amount of academic research can replace experience.

For those of you who might not know, Peter Forthmann published his book on the internet. You can download it for free, at: http://www.windpilot.com/index.html
One of the things he acknowledges is that there are many good windvanes on the market, and there is not that much difference between them. It is rather refreshing to see that someone with something to sell chooses to market it without bashing the competition.

I think I will opt for the Windpilot due to weight considerations since I have a 27. Despite assurances from Monitor that weight is not an issue, the vane actually extends the length of the boat and the weight is highly leveraged at this end position. If I had a bit larger boat, I would not be concerned.

Matt: I really was interested in your comments about the effect of the dodger. I plan to build a dodger as well as install a windvane. I would like to have a fairly large one for sun protection. I meant to ask about the effect on the windvane, so I am glad you brought it up. Does anyone else have any experiences with this issue? If so, I would sure be interested.

John: I opened the lazarette – holy cow. I took a digital picture of “the thing” and measured it. I am going to send the picture and dimensioned line drawing to Forthmann for his comments. If you wish, I can share his feedback.

Thanks again,

Bob
Longshot
CD-27

[John Vigor]

Bob, I'd be very interested to hear what Peter Forthmann says about installing the Windpilot around the web in the lazarette. I plan to bolt mine on, one way or another, in two or three weeks' time.

If you haven't bought a Windpilot yet, you might want to consider whether you need the special horizontal bar to which the first turning blocks attach after the lines leave the moving upper arm. It seems to me that the lead from the arm to blocks fixed to the stern pulpit would be at an inefficient angle--probably more than the 30 degrees maximum recommended. But I'm not sure of this because I haven't tested the vane gear in place yet. It's just another problem lurking in the back of my mind, one that would be cured by the addition of the horizontal bar that Windpilot makes specially for this purpose.

I might also have to chop a bit of length off the servo tube, otherwise I think the oar will be too far under water and cause a bit of drag. I already have the shortest tube Windpilot makes, but by my esimate it's going to be about 4 inches too long. Luckily, it's an easy job to shorten the tube and drill new holes for the bolt.

A normal dodger won't affect the wind vane. A larger one might, but if the deflection of air is consistent, it doesn't matter. You can turn the vane to compensate. Your only problem would be fluctuating vortices, which I think would be unlikely, given that the closest you can point to the wind is about 40 degrees, and if you strike a 40-degree angle aft of the dodger it's likely to miss the wind vane. On all other angles of sail there's no problem, only a hard beat.

John V.

[Bob Schwartz]

John:

Let me give you some history. I first spoke with Greg Kruegermann, the US representative. Greg seemed to think that an MF0 mount might work. However, he was concerned that because of the rake in the stern, that it might be necessary to shim out the mount with a piece of wood – around an inch or so. Greg was winging it, and referred the matter to Peter.

Before I heard from Peter, I became aware of “the thing” as per your post. I sent a digital photo and dimensioned line drawing of the thing to Peter. He responded that the MF1 will fit with no problem and that this is what I needed for CD-27. He invited me to look at the template which is posted on their website.

There are two templates for a mounting plate, one for the MF0 and one for the MF1 through MF4. The MF0 template shows horizontal centers between drill holes (the F dimension) to be 7”. The F dimension on the MF1-4 mount is 8.5”.

The thing measures 7.75 inches beginning 1.25 inches under the bottom of the deck. It V’s down, so I suspect that 4” down (exterior measurement) the width would be around 6.5-7” conservatively – probably 6.5 at least. I do not know what the interior mounting package looks like – probably fairly large washers. The MF1-4 at 8.5 centers drilled at a 6.5 level of the thing, would leave 1 inch clearance between it and the center. (2 inch washer) I do not know what the mounting kit looks like, but that sounds reasonable to me. However, I doubt if the MFO mounting base (7.0 centers) would be wide enough.

Unless I hear from you that things might not be right in Dodge, I am willing to assume at this point that the MF1 kit is appropriate and that it will fit.

About the special horizontal bar to avoid the 30 degree plus bend - I too had this concern. I expressed it to Greg. Peter quoted a turnkey package about $150 higher than I expected. (He just said this is the price to fit a CD-27) I suspect that the bar is included. If not, I have looked at the installation photos on the Windpilot site until almost going blind. There are two words to describe the routing of the lines beyond the Windpilot – Rube Goldberg. I think the 30 degree thing will be well exceeded, and without a crossbar the steering lines will be swinging lines side to side rather than back and forth. I think that I can fabricate some kind of extension if I do not get the bar. This is kind of an open decision in the purchase.

I sure appreciate your comments on the dodger. I want to avoid the sun monster as much as possible. I am thinking of making a dodger that can partially fold-up so in the extended position it is more like a bimini, and with one section folded, a dodger. This is only in the thinking stages. Have not seen it, but don’t know why it would not work. I am going to build it myself, so it will be in the relative cheap. (I think Rube might be my distant cousin)

Anyway, hope this helps. If you see anything that does not look right – in terms of the MF1 not working, please advise ASAP, before my dollars are converted to euros and escape forever.

Regards,
Bob
Longshot

[John Vigor]

Bob, I have the MF1. It doesn't fit around the "thing" because you need space for the washers inside the lazarette. the washers are 1 1/2 inches in diameter. At the top, where the MF1's two uppermost bolts would come through, the "thing" is almost 8 inches wide. The MF1 space between bolts, center to center is about the same--less than the stipulated 8 1/2 inches because we have curved transoms, not flat. So there's no room for one half of the washers.

I thought of cutting slots in the sides of the "thing" with a Dremel tool or something, just to accommodate the nuts and washers, and that could work, I guess, but I wasn't too keen.

What I have done so far is to widen the MF1 footprint by inserting 3/4-inch spacers between MF0 and MF1, this giving me a horizontal footprint of 9 1/2 inches, which will clear the "thing," washers and all.

But it seems to me that MF1 is actually not necessary. It makes the vane gear protrude farther away from the transom, even in the closest position you can fix it, which in turn worsens the important angle of the lines coming from the moving arm, which we discussed before. The closer you can get the gear to the transom, the better the lead to the quarter blocks.

Now, MF0 on its own won't do the trick because it hasn't got enough play to cope with the 60° angle of the CD's transom. You need the MF1, with its extra adjustment, to get the vane to stand vertical.

But I'm planning to ditch the MF1 (and it's surprising weight) and use a simple stainless steel plate on the transom--1/8th-inch 304 or 316 plate, about 12 inches wide by 9 inches deep. It will have sides about a couple inches deep (not yet measured) going back to the transom. At the transom, the sides will be bent inwards at right angles for an inch or so, parallel to the transom and parallel to the outside plate. Holes through these bent-over lugs will enable me to bolt the whole fitting to the transom, with the bolts well clear of the "thing."

The side pieces will be angled so that the outside plate itself will be
vertical, thus making it easy to bolt MF0 onto it and get the vane upright.

It's actually a lot simpler than it sounds and I'm sure my local metal shop can fabricate it for half the price of the MF1 fitting. You could do it in wood, too, I guess, if you wanted to, but I think a stainless plate would be simpler.

This setup will get the gear as close as possible to the transom and probably make the horizontal bar unnecessary. I don't think it will be any heavier than the combined MF0/MF1 setup. It will enable you to get the vane up higher on the transom, which is necessary because the servo arm is too long if you bolt the fittings on in the suggested position, 4 inches down from deck level. (The actual tube on top of the oar blade would drag through the water.) It will enable you to put a decent backing on the inside of the transom bolts. And, importantly, I think, it will look a look neater than the clunky MF0/MF1 combination.

I'm not too worried about acquiring a crossbar. I'm sure I can figure out some kind of extension from the deck if necessary, but I'm fairly confident it won't be necessary when the stainless steel fitting gets the vane up nice and close to the transom.

You don't need the MF1 if you're willing to fiddle around a bit and make alternative arrangements. One thing this exercise did impress on me, however, is how few boats these days have traditional counter sterns like Cape Dories.

John Vigor
CD27 "Sangoma"
Bellingham, WA

[kerrydeare]

I noticed somewhere in here a comment about the Navik, with one writer mentioning Kerry Deare. I can only say that since installing the Navik (in 1987!) I have had no regrets. This unit is (relatively) inexpensive, quite rugged, and very accurate. No one likes to put weight in the "ends" and that is one of the main attractions of the Navik. Another is the ability to completely remove the steering oar in harbor. No matter which unit one chooses, they are designed for sailing and damned awkward in harbor, especially when uninitiated friends drop by in the dink (ouch). I can answer any questions (or at least try to).

[ricks]

I noticed somewhere in here a comment about the Navik, with one writer mentioning Kerry Deare. I can only say that since installing the Navik (in 1987!) I have had no regrets. This unit is (relatively) inexpensive, quite rugged, and very accurate. No one likes to put weight in the "ends" and that is one of the main attractions of the Navik. Another is the ability to completely remove the steering oar in harbor. No matter which unit one chooses, they are designed for sailing and damned awkward in harbor, especially when uninitiated friends drop by in the dink (ouch). I can answer any questions (or at least try to).

Hi Kerry,
I originally asked the question about the Navik. I have done a fair amount of research and feel the Navik may be the best solution for me and my 25D. I have some questions for you but rather than clutter the board why not email me privately. I don't see your email address included with your post.

Thanks!

Rick

[Armond]

Try "kerrydeare-at-bigfoot-dot-com."