As was said, it is about preference. It is comparable to a discussion about
cars - manual or automatic? Neither is right or wrong, just different and
different folks do things differently. The only time a furler would put you
in a bad situation is if your sail is partially furled and it jams as you
try to unroll it to bring the sail down. A furler is nothing more than a
headfoil that turns and all racers use foils on their headsails - usually
double foils so they can do a faster sail swap. It is no big deal to take a
sail up or down with a foil - easier than hanks as one doesn't have to pull
the little piston out on each one. Most of the cruisers I've met when I was
out cruising use furlers, a few use hanked on sails but they are the
minority. I take my sails off regularly rather than leaving them on the
furler- better on the sail.
Modern, good furlers rarely have any problem with jamming - there isn't that
much to jam. In my thousands of ocean miles, on many different boats over
many decades, I've only had one problem with a furler and that was my fault
when the shackle screw backed out and hung up against the rigging aloft and
wouldn't unfurl so I could drop the headsail. This was in the middle of the
Pacific and the wind was picking up - but heading up took the pressure off
the sail and I was able to get it down with a little finessing. Not a big
deal and it never happened again as I then always secured the shackle
properly. Most of the high-end cruising sailboats come with furlers - I've
never seen a Hallberg-Rassy without one and we used to commission and work
on many of those boats and other cruisers. My HR even had a furling main -
that did worry me a bit, but I wouldn't have done without it.
I worry far more about the diesel giving me problems than the furler, as I
doubt I could fix that on my own - at least away from the dock. And I don't
think I could make it up the narrow river channel against the 3 kt current
to my moorage under sail. But I wouldn't do without an engine either. This
discussion reminds me of a story in an old book I was reading. At the turn
of the 20th century the old salts all said that a real sailor didn't need
one of those stinky engines on board.
From:
AlbinVega@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
AlbinVega@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of vegatern
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 6:36 PM
To:
AlbinVega@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AlbinVega] Re: dodgers, hanks, and furlers..
I know this is a small thing, but I don't see it as an "old salt
vs newbie" issue, but just as different ways facing potential
problems. Saying I don't trust furling gear is not the same as
claiming it will fail. It is an admission that I recognize, with my
limited mechanical ability, that I would probably be unable to repair
it, should it fail. If I can't repair it, alone, then I have to
seriously consider whether it should be on the boat. I'm not a "salt"
either. Just a bouy sailor, out around the bouys after work and
Sunday afternoons. Regardless of where I sail, I want to know, or at
least believe, that I will be able to handle situations which may
arise. For me, that means systems must be simple and redundant. I
like the short mast and external halyards though I know there are more
modern views. I'm not a Luddite. The boat has GPS, Autohelm, VHF,
depthfinder, with backups, or multiple backups, for each. And I am
looking forward to AIS. But the failure of all of these together
would not put the boat in immediate risk, which the failure of the
furler might. It's interesting, to me anyway, that although I also
sail almost exclusively singlehanded, I viewed the furler as a
greater potential problem than it would be if I had a crew. At least
with a crew there would be someone to handle the boat while I went
forward to the sail. In any case I enjoy the different opinions.
Craig ;-)
