I am in the market for a new boat 40 Feet in size. My Question is how mooch power will I give up with the in mast over a full batten. Question #2 how often has your in mast gotten jam in normal or heavy weather. I tend to sail in 15 knots plus wind when I can find it.
- Status
Furling
Can not answer how much power you will loose. However, to furl or reef you should be into the wind. You can sometimes get away with a starboard tack depending on how hard it is blowing. Port will never work. I have no battens in the main. That option came out a year latter. But I am very happy with the convience of mast furling.
Can not answer how much power you will loose. However, to furl or reef you should be into the wind. You can sometimes get away with a starboard tack depending on how hard it is blowing. Port will never work. I have no battens in the main. That option came out a year latter. But I am very happy with the convience of mast furling.
Depends on what your needs are
I have a 340 in mast furling and would never give it up. The furling systems today are much more reliable than the earlier models. Mine has never failed. But you need to assess your needs. Speed at all costs leads to full batten while convenience and very easy sail rigging points to in mast. The best advantage I heard re in mast was from the dealer who simpy stated with in mast you are no longer working against gravity -the sail is already up and you are pulling it out horizontally (why I would never get in boom furling). I have very arthritc hands and so to avoid the haul up every time I sail furling is a real treat. Many other boats get lazy and simply sail on the jib - we never do. We always have both sails out , balanced and sailing as designed. My wife usually does the main as its so easy. Racers come on board and can't believe our easy our boat is to sail. Also returning to port we simply pull in the main in a second and are ready for a beer once we dock. No flaking, no sail cover to wrestle with. I don't race so I'm sold on the convenience and the ease. We can also reef to any degree we wish. Good luck.
I have a 340 in mast furling and would never give it up. The furling systems today are much more reliable than the earlier models. Mine has never failed. But you need to assess your needs. Speed at all costs leads to full batten while convenience and very easy sail rigging points to in mast. The best advantage I heard re in mast was from the dealer who simpy stated with in mast you are no longer working against gravity -the sail is already up and you are pulling it out horizontally (why I would never get in boom furling). I have very arthritc hands and so to avoid the haul up every time I sail furling is a real treat. Many other boats get lazy and simply sail on the jib - we never do. We always have both sails out , balanced and sailing as designed. My wife usually does the main as its so easy. Racers come on board and can't believe our easy our boat is to sail. Also returning to port we simply pull in the main in a second and are ready for a beer once we dock. No flaking, no sail cover to wrestle with. I don't race so I'm sold on the convenience and the ease. We can also reef to any degree we wish. Good luck.
In favor of in-boom furling
First off let me preface these comments with we are currently "former" sailors" who have temporarily gone to the dark side to do The Great Loop. We'll be back into sailing Summer '07. We owned a 426DS (aka 44DS) with in-boom furling and would never consider another sailboat without it. We had all the advantages of a full-roach, full batten mainsail. This is an important feature in any B&R rig as the main sail is the power sail and any reduction in size is going to have consdierable impact on performance. You simply cannot take away 10-15% sail area and expect the boat to perform the same. On a boat the size of a 44', the sail area is considerable. Prior boat was a H340 and our DS had more sail area in the mainsail than the 340 had combined in the main and jib. Properly set up, the in-boom furling was a breeze to handle. Raising was done with a power winch (boat 40' or larger will most likely be equipped with at least one); reefing was infinitely variable; and furling was done with power also. One big advantage was reefing ability on any point of sail. All in all the boom furling was a great set-up. I have noticed the newer generation in-mast furling systems feature vertical battens and more roach area in the main sail. This looks good.
First off let me preface these comments with we are currently "former" sailors" who have temporarily gone to the dark side to do The Great Loop. We'll be back into sailing Summer '07. We owned a 426DS (aka 44DS) with in-boom furling and would never consider another sailboat without it. We had all the advantages of a full-roach, full batten mainsail. This is an important feature in any B&R rig as the main sail is the power sail and any reduction in size is going to have consdierable impact on performance. You simply cannot take away 10-15% sail area and expect the boat to perform the same. On a boat the size of a 44', the sail area is considerable. Prior boat was a H340 and our DS had more sail area in the mainsail than the 340 had combined in the main and jib. Properly set up, the in-boom furling was a breeze to handle. Raising was done with a power winch (boat 40' or larger will most likely be equipped with at least one); reefing was infinitely variable; and furling was done with power also. One big advantage was reefing ability on any point of sail. All in all the boom furling was a great set-up. I have noticed the newer generation in-mast furling systems feature vertical battens and more roach area in the main sail. This looks good.
I have ordered in-boom for my new 49.
In comparing the options for the main, many things moved me toward in-boom furling. Primarily, the considerably larger sail area of in-boom compared to in-mast. The in-mast sail area is only 73% (80% with vertical battens) of the standard full-roach sail area, while the in-boom area is 97.5%. I will happily give-up the 2.5% of sail area for the ease and convenience of in-boom.
In comparing the options for the main, many things moved me toward in-boom furling. Primarily, the considerably larger sail area of in-boom compared to in-mast. The in-mast sail area is only 73% (80% with vertical battens) of the standard full-roach sail area, while the in-boom area is 97.5%. I will happily give-up the 2.5% of sail area for the ease and convenience of in-boom.
in mast
Joe, We're talking cruising boats here, not some go fast racing sled, so I'd be tempted to sacrifice a little sail area for saftey and convenience. With in-boom furling you still have to raise and lower the sail. In addition to much higher initial cost you also add the mechanical complexity of having to make a luff tape feed into the mast groove smoothly as the sail is raised. Setup and boom angle are critical for them to function without jamming. If it absolutely bugs you to loose that sail area then look into the verticle batten main option. Simpler, less finicky and cheaper. BTW Hunter puts a taller mast on most of thier in-mast rigs than they do on thier standard rigs to make up for some of the lost sail area. Bob
Joe, We're talking cruising boats here, not some go fast racing sled, so I'd be tempted to sacrifice a little sail area for saftey and convenience. With in-boom furling you still have to raise and lower the sail. In addition to much higher initial cost you also add the mechanical complexity of having to make a luff tape feed into the mast groove smoothly as the sail is raised. Setup and boom angle are critical for them to function without jamming. If it absolutely bugs you to loose that sail area then look into the verticle batten main option. Simpler, less finicky and cheaper. BTW Hunter puts a taller mast on most of thier in-mast rigs than they do on thier standard rigs to make up for some of the lost sail area. Bob
what kind of main
Essentially you have four choices in main sail configurations: * conventional full batten * in boom * in mast * in mast with vertical batten sail. If we are talking Hunter and Hunter only, I would pass on the conventional full batten. No doubt it gives you the best sailing characteristics but with the arch it is almost impossible to get a sail cover on the main. I find the permanently attached sail covers to be aesthetically offensive when I am sailing. I would also take a pass on the in boom furler. Despite what Frank Arndoerfer says, and he is an extremely knowledgeable former Hunter owner; I personally find the significant extra cost (2 to 3 times) over in mast furling to be prohibitive. The service guys at my local Hunter dealer (and they have been Hunter dealers for about 20 years) tell me that the mast to boom angle is critical or else the system may well foul. As a former racer (and aren't we all) I love the convenience of the in mast system but just cannot give up the extra sail area and the ability to really control the shape of the main. Almost 2 years ago Doyle came out with the Zenith main, a vertical batten main sail. Fits the Selden spar on the Hunter beautifully, gives you battens like a conventional main (although oriented differently), and restores much of the sail area lost to a typical in mast furling. I was told that Quantum is also doing these types of main sails but cannot confirm that. The price premium when ordered on a new Hunter is not all that bad (price obviously depends on the model). I've sailed a new 38 and 41 both with the in mast furler and in mast with vertical battens and the difference is very noticeable both as to pointing ability and speed. Just one sailor's view.
Essentially you have four choices in main sail configurations: * conventional full batten * in boom * in mast * in mast with vertical batten sail. If we are talking Hunter and Hunter only, I would pass on the conventional full batten. No doubt it gives you the best sailing characteristics but with the arch it is almost impossible to get a sail cover on the main. I find the permanently attached sail covers to be aesthetically offensive when I am sailing. I would also take a pass on the in boom furler. Despite what Frank Arndoerfer says, and he is an extremely knowledgeable former Hunter owner; I personally find the significant extra cost (2 to 3 times) over in mast furling to be prohibitive. The service guys at my local Hunter dealer (and they have been Hunter dealers for about 20 years) tell me that the mast to boom angle is critical or else the system may well foul. As a former racer (and aren't we all) I love the convenience of the in mast system but just cannot give up the extra sail area and the ability to really control the shape of the main. Almost 2 years ago Doyle came out with the Zenith main, a vertical batten main sail. Fits the Selden spar on the Hunter beautifully, gives you battens like a conventional main (although oriented differently), and restores much of the sail area lost to a typical in mast furling. I was told that Quantum is also doing these types of main sails but cannot confirm that. The price premium when ordered on a new Hunter is not all that bad (price obviously depends on the model). I've sailed a new 38 and 41 both with the in mast furler and in mast with vertical battens and the difference is very noticeable both as to pointing ability and speed. Just one sailor's view.
Mainsail
Joe, I sail in the area where you sail. I would say that approximately, 80% of the time, winds are 10 kts or less. Actually, the year round average winds for the Cheasapeake Bay are only 7kts. This would seem to indicate a conventional main with full battens because the speed difference in light are is noticable. This part is a no-brainer. What you have to weigh is the convenience of being able to just roll your sail up against having to drop the halyard, furl the sail and put it into a sail cover. On my 40.5, this is a considerable amount of work. I do not consider the few times that I have to reef as a hassel at all. That system works well. I have a Dutchman system and the sail furls well, but because of it, the sail cover is more difficult to put on. Additionally, I have to climb up a few steps on the mast in order to attach and detach the halyard. To do this, you must wrap your arms around the mast and hold yourself up while you attach the halyard. Consider this as the trade off and decide from there.
Joe, I sail in the area where you sail. I would say that approximately, 80% of the time, winds are 10 kts or less. Actually, the year round average winds for the Cheasapeake Bay are only 7kts. This would seem to indicate a conventional main with full battens because the speed difference in light are is noticable. This part is a no-brainer. What you have to weigh is the convenience of being able to just roll your sail up against having to drop the halyard, furl the sail and put it into a sail cover. On my 40.5, this is a considerable amount of work. I do not consider the few times that I have to reef as a hassel at all. That system works well. I have a Dutchman system and the sail furls well, but because of it, the sail cover is more difficult to put on. Additionally, I have to climb up a few steps on the mast in order to attach and detach the halyard. To do this, you must wrap your arms around the mast and hold yourself up while you attach the halyard. Consider this as the trade off and decide from there.
Full batten mainsail on H36
Joe - On an H36 the "standard" mainsail is 426 sq-ft, while the in-mast furlable mainsail is only 384sq-ft. In any given windspeed, that translates into a 10% reduction in propulsive force. Since the B&R rig is designed to make possible a large roach, that also meant to me accepting its downwind sailing limitations without getting the benefit that justifies them. However, the "standard" UK mainsail came with only 2 full battens and 2 leach battens. So, when I ordered Persephone I had Doyle make a set of sails for me out of 8.8oz type 52 dacron designed for sailing in conditions between 3 and 35 kts. The all-full-batten mainsail is 490sq-ft (15% larger than the "standard" mainsail, and 25% larger than the in-mast furlable), In winds under 10kts Persephione walks away from most of the boats around here, especially H356s, 380s and 386s with roller-furling mainsails. (Early last week, in 6-8kts, the big fast catamaran "Ninth Wave" that was taking tourists out to the Isles of Shoals fell further and further behind, when I was doing 6 kts on a beam reach. Having informally jousted with them before, I don't think they were happy <g>. However, in 10-15kts, I have to struggle to keep up, and often lose to them.) Unless your area consistenly has winds over 10-12kts, you'll find the extra area of the full roach lets you sail when many are motoring. Of course, to get the wind range I wanted, I had to have 3 reef points and the accompanying extra lines led aft, but I have sailed over 3,000nm with it in all conditions between 3 and 30kts (and involuntarily in some higher speeds). (The Gulf of Maine typically has Force 2-3 SW'lies in July and August. This time of year we typically have Force 4-6 W'lies and NW'lies - though it's been Force 8-10 this past weekend.) There's no question that a furling mainsail is more convenient, but with all-full-battens the lazy-jacks work like a charm. I admit to being a bit of a singlehanding seaworthiness freak, and have made many mods to Persephine, accordingly. However, I've had to go forward tethered to a jackline in order to un-jam a partially furled jib in Force 6 conditions which taxed the autopilot. That was a consequence of my not installing my foremost fairlead exactly perpendicular to the winding axis of the drum this Spring, and has since been corrected. However, I shudder to think about dealing with a jammed mainsail inside that inaccessible mast cavity. I understand that the necessarily loose luff with a boom-furling mainsail gives up a little sail shape, but only enough of a performance hit for out-and-out racers to think significant. The fact that its failure mode is to drop like a standard mainsail I find very attractive. However, it wasn't an option for me and I realize that the technology is not yet as proven as headsail roller-furlers (or in-mast furlers). Since the purpose of battens is to maintain a transverse wing curve, I've never understood why putting them in a sail lengthwise (along the wing) would be of any benefit - breathless marketing talk notwithstanding. (I also wonder about the effect they may have on one's ability to put a lot of twist in the sail to spill higher winds, but I prefer to reef-down to a smaller and better sailshape, anyway.) Like every other choice in boat design and fitting-out, it greatly depends on the conditions in which you sail, and the priorities you personally give to performance, convenience, safety margin, cost, etc., etc. Fair winds. Al
Joe - On an H36 the "standard" mainsail is 426 sq-ft, while the in-mast furlable mainsail is only 384sq-ft. In any given windspeed, that translates into a 10% reduction in propulsive force. Since the B&R rig is designed to make possible a large roach, that also meant to me accepting its downwind sailing limitations without getting the benefit that justifies them. However, the "standard" UK mainsail came with only 2 full battens and 2 leach battens. So, when I ordered Persephone I had Doyle make a set of sails for me out of 8.8oz type 52 dacron designed for sailing in conditions between 3 and 35 kts. The all-full-batten mainsail is 490sq-ft (15% larger than the "standard" mainsail, and 25% larger than the in-mast furlable), In winds under 10kts Persephione walks away from most of the boats around here, especially H356s, 380s and 386s with roller-furling mainsails. (Early last week, in 6-8kts, the big fast catamaran "Ninth Wave" that was taking tourists out to the Isles of Shoals fell further and further behind, when I was doing 6 kts on a beam reach. Having informally jousted with them before, I don't think they were happy <g>. However, in 10-15kts, I have to struggle to keep up, and often lose to them.) Unless your area consistenly has winds over 10-12kts, you'll find the extra area of the full roach lets you sail when many are motoring. Of course, to get the wind range I wanted, I had to have 3 reef points and the accompanying extra lines led aft, but I have sailed over 3,000nm with it in all conditions between 3 and 30kts (and involuntarily in some higher speeds). (The Gulf of Maine typically has Force 2-3 SW'lies in July and August. This time of year we typically have Force 4-6 W'lies and NW'lies - though it's been Force 8-10 this past weekend.) There's no question that a furling mainsail is more convenient, but with all-full-battens the lazy-jacks work like a charm. I admit to being a bit of a singlehanding seaworthiness freak, and have made many mods to Persephine, accordingly. However, I've had to go forward tethered to a jackline in order to un-jam a partially furled jib in Force 6 conditions which taxed the autopilot. That was a consequence of my not installing my foremost fairlead exactly perpendicular to the winding axis of the drum this Spring, and has since been corrected. However, I shudder to think about dealing with a jammed mainsail inside that inaccessible mast cavity. I understand that the necessarily loose luff with a boom-furling mainsail gives up a little sail shape, but only enough of a performance hit for out-and-out racers to think significant. The fact that its failure mode is to drop like a standard mainsail I find very attractive. However, it wasn't an option for me and I realize that the technology is not yet as proven as headsail roller-furlers (or in-mast furlers). Since the purpose of battens is to maintain a transverse wing curve, I've never understood why putting them in a sail lengthwise (along the wing) would be of any benefit - breathless marketing talk notwithstanding. (I also wonder about the effect they may have on one's ability to put a lot of twist in the sail to spill higher winds, but I prefer to reef-down to a smaller and better sailshape, anyway.) Like every other choice in boat design and fitting-out, it greatly depends on the conditions in which you sail, and the priorities you personally give to performance, convenience, safety margin, cost, etc., etc. Fair winds. Al
Light air
For what it's worth, you're probably a whole lot better off putting up a cruising chute when the wind gets light. Most modern asym's are easy to use and can be carried in a far greater range of angles and velocities than in years past. Just my 2 cents.
For what it's worth, you're probably a whole lot better off putting up a cruising chute when the wind gets light. Most modern asym's are easy to use and can be carried in a far greater range of angles and velocities than in years past. Just my 2 cents.
- Status