Nomad is a Gazelle rigged to Tom Colvin's specifications. As to her windward ability, it depends. In the typical rough and tumble of offshore sailing, no it not going to happen. Think tacking through 170-180 degres. In protected waters it's a different story. She will lay a track of Z's across the chart plotter. A little more keel may help it a little, but I think the issue is with the flat sails having no drive upwind. I recently sailed in company upwind with China Blue , a Hasler Jester design with hinged battens. She only had marginally more windward ability.  It was a pleasure to sail in flat water and go  upwind, somethingI I rarely get to do.

The jib is a necessity to go upwind and in balancing the large main. Downwind it's sheeted to center to help the windvane cope withe the huge mainsail stuck out to one side. With a stayed rig it's impossible to get the fore out far enough to go wing and wing, it just gybes repeatedly. 

I have sailed Nomad many more miles than Tom Colvin sailed the original Gazelle, most of it single handed. It's not difficult, but one needs to be organized with the deck work and knowing how manuevers happen and potential problems to watch for only comes with experience. The Gazelle is a great boat with some limitations that can be worked with once you understand what she can and cannot do.

The is room for improvement in sail handling and performance. Tom Colvin took a rather dim view of people changing his designs, so the Gazelle is stuck as a 1960s design that could use a little new innovation. But I am not willing to sacrifice the simplicity and durability of Colvin's rig with some of the more high tech solutions I have seen at the JRA. And it can easily be repaired with cheap locally sourced materials. The requirements for ocean sailing are a little different than local boats .

Anonymous wrote:

Maxime wrote:

David wrote:

Anyone thinking of buying a Gazelle should read the little book 'Cruising Designs',

I've read most of Colvin's work but actually couldn't remember that passage. From what people are saying, it does seem as if she wouldn't fly to windward with the original rig. The Gazelle I'm looking at has almost-new sails, so I'd be using them for a good long while. But there would be an opportunity to modify the rig at some point. Unless I'm mistaken, many Gazelles were engineless (including Colvin's, I think) and were sailed all over. So it can't be that bad, can it?

I am interested in the hull design, too. She's reputed to be very fast on passages, and the draft is shallow enough to allow poking into all sorts of places. And the interior arrangement seems convenient.

I'm eagerly awaiting the accounts from people in this thread!

Now that reputation I can go along with. Tom Colvin says he owned over 40 boats, and Gazelle stood out as his favorite over all of them. "As a sailing vessel she could be matched by few others for handiness, comfort, seakindliness, or ability". But he sailed her engineless for only 6000 miles, then with a small diesel for a further 4000 miles before he sold her and "built a larger vessel that we could live aboard permanently", and I don't think that amounts to a lifelong love affair, does it? 

How would I modify the rig? Lose the jib and bowsprit, put two unstayed masts in the same positions as the existing stayed masts, and put on two sails with more or less vertical leeches and single sheets, their relative sizes to be determined by helm balance but probably approximately equal in area.

To be fair, Colvin had a wife and three kids, while I only plan on sailing alone or as a couple, with occasional short-term guests.

But as a point against the Gazelle, Colvin's original was ultra-light (18 000 lbs), with 10-gauge Corten steel, while most were reportedly built around 24 000 lbs or even heavier, so his glowing endorsement may not apply.

Back when I bought my first Gazelle (which came de-rigged), I had designed a new rig for it, somewhat as you describe, and started sewing up sails, but I'm not sure it would have been successful. The new rig was to be much taller than the old one, and I'm not sure the boat would have stood up to it well. I've attached a plan photo of that new rig.

Anonymous wrote:

Anyone thinking of buying a Gazelle should read the little book 'Cruising Designs', by Thomas Colvin. I'll just quote this from the chapter 'Toward a design philosophy':

'Superb windward ability in cruising vessels is not a requirement. What is required is good performance in close reaching, broad reaching, and running, as it is rare, especially in ocean cruising, that one sails closer than 5 1/2 or 6 points to the wind. With this in mind, low rigs and generous sail area are axiomatic. '

There are also chapters on the Gazelle and comments on the chinese rig. 

Tom Colvin was undoubtedly a fine seaman, designer and boat builder, but he was dancing to a different tune from that of almost all other sailors. In the decades after WW2, he was the main driving force in the North American school of thought regarding 'westernised' chinese boats and chinese rigs. He drew on notes, sketches and photos that he'd taken whilst in China, but said that available information was meagre. Basically he tried to copy some traditional chinese types of boat and rig. At the same time in Europe, the main driving force was Blondie Hasler, who took the basic concept of the chinese rig and totally re-imagined it for use on yachts, resulting in Jester in 1960. To a large extent, those schools of thought have now merged. We recognise, I think, that Blondie oversimplified the sailplan, that Tom stuck too rigidly to traditional sailplans, and most of all, that a flat sail, though easier to understand than a cambered sail, is never going to be very good at windward work. We need and expect better than 6 points to the wind (67.5˚) in a coastal cruising yacht, and expect it even in an ocean cruising yacht.

I've read most of Colvin's work but actually couldn't remember that passage. From what people are saying, it does seem as if she wouldn't fly to windward with the original rig. The Gazelle I'm looking at has almost-new sails, so I'd be using them for a good long while. But there would be an opportunity to modify the rig at some point. Unless I'm mistaken, many Gazelles were engineless (including Colvin's, I think) and were sailed all over. So it can't be that bad, can it?

I am interested in the hull design, too. She's reputed to be very fast on passages, and the draft is shallow enough to allow poking into all sorts of places. And the interior arrangement seems convenient.

I'm eagerly awaiting the accounts from people in this thread!

Anonymous wrote:

When I see photos of Colvin junks, I cant help thinking that just about everything is wrong with those sails. However, since I have never been on board or sailed alongside a any Colvin boat, I may be perfectly wrong. For what I know, they sail like witches to windward and tack without any kind of snags.

I am very interested in hearing how these craft work.

Arne

I’m completely and totally brand new to Sailing and junk rigs, but I’ve been reading and learning everything I can.

Ive just recently been looking at buy a decent condition gazelle in Australia, ive read in a few places they aren’t great to windward, though I won’t be racing it or anything. But Being new at all this I’m not yet familiar with every type of rig and I’m genuinely curious as to why you believe the sails seem to look wrong. Is it just the non cambered plan, or is there something else I should be watching out for?

Cheers :)

Nic V

The only time that I've seen a Gazelle under sail was on 7th October 2008, as we beat out of Neah Bay, Juan de Fuca Strait, heading south towards California  and Mexico. It was just after a big storm had passed through, and we were taking a quieter spell before the next one came (all the Washington and Oregon harbours were reporting very dangerous entry conditions, so we went straight to Bodega Bay). The swells were big, and the log says we had 2 reefs in main and mizzen (wingsails). At the same time, a Gazelle which may have been called Freebird left Neah Bay. We were some way ahead of them, but it seemed that they were having a lot of trouble making headway in the prevailing rough conditions, and I think they eventually turned back. Tystie was making adequate headway, but the Gazelle seemed to be going at about half the speed. Only anecdotal, I know, but it did seem as though the Gazelle was not a windward performer.